On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 5:29pm -0800, Guy Harris wrote:
> It is? Not for me - I need an explanation
>
By "self-explanatory" I mean only the purpose of the feature -- not the
definitions. That surely demands a lot more thought, opinions, etc.
> > and in the old format it would be something l
On Feb 9, 2005, at 8:46 PM, Felipe Kellermann wrote:
I've recently read the draft of the new file format -- very
interesting.
I'd like to raise a question here on a feature I've always thought
would
be useful: An offset, in addition to the snaplen. This feature is
surely
almost self-explanatory
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 2:28pm -0800, Loris Degioanni wrote:
> I think a block with data that starts at an arbitrary position of the packet
> would be useful, but it would be impossible (or at least hard) for the typical
> sniffer like Ethereal or tcpdump to dissect it. A possible solution could be
>
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:41pm +0100, Gianluca Varenni wrote:
> I haven't yet thought if it would be better to add it as an option, or as a
> field of the IDB.
I think it would be better placed before the snaplen field in the IDB. The
reason is that it would ease the decision of the parsers in fin
The original message was received at Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:20:35 +0200
from juniper.net [98.210.38.196]
- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
-
This is the tcpdump-workers list.
Visit https://lists.sandelman.ca/ to unsubscribe.
