On Feb 6, 2011, at 10:07 PM, Luca Bruno wrote:
> I can't speak for Lenny, but it looks like Squeeze (which was released
> a couple of days ago) has both:
> * http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/libpcap0.8
Ah, so Squeeze has the libpcap 1.1.1 version of libpcap 0.8. :-)
(Yes, it makes no sense to
Hello,
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Guy Harris wrote:
>
> On Feb 4, 2011, at 12:25 AM, M.Baris Demiray wrote:
>
>> In fact this is not what STANAG 5066 Annex H "Implementation Guide and
>> Notes" section suggests. According to this section and the tests held
>> by DRA (Defence Research Agency
Guy Harris scrisse:
> You need at least libpcap 1.0.0 to have tpacket ("turbo-packet",
> right?) support in the standard libpcap. You could also get it with
> the Phil Wood patches he mentioned, although that only supports
> memory-mapped access on Linux, not FreeBSD - but he's using Linux, so
>
hi,
i'd like to be able to capture from an ethernet device on linux using
the DLT_LINUX_SLL link type. i don't see any way to accomplish this
using the existing API; libpcap really wants to give me a DLT_EN10MB
handle.
i submitted a patch to allow DLT_LINUX_SLL on ethernet devices a few
months b
On Feb 5, 2011, at 11:20 PM, M. V. wrote:
> as i mentioned in my previous mail, (with the title: "HUGE packet-drop") i'm
> having problem trying to dump gigabit traffic on harddisk with tcpdump on
> Debian5.0. i tried almost everything but got no success.
Did you try to check whether the memor
On Jan 31, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> M. V. yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> so, i dont know what else to do, seems like nothing works for me :-S
>> 1) does anyone have any other suggestions that may help?
>> 2) about MMAP support in Debian kernel: i installed Debian5.0.3 from
>
On Feb 3, 2011, at 10:36 AM, Masahiro Kamikubo wrote:
> When the tcpdump command was executed hereafter, the network was cut.
"Cut" meaning that you lost network connection on the network interface on
which you were capturing network traffic?
If so, that might be a problem with...
> The envir
On Feb 4, 2011, at 12:25 AM, M.Baris Demiray wrote:
> In fact this is not what STANAG 5066 Annex H "Implementation Guide and
> Notes" section suggests. According to this section and the tests held
> by DRA (Defence Research Agency),
>
> 1) The throughput is not strongly sensitive to frame size
>
On Feb 4, 2011, at 1:59 AM, Schemmel, Hans-Christoph wrote:
> The parts that don´t correspond to a PPP packet are AT commands or responses
> (like "ATI", "AT+CSQ" or "+CSQ: 18,99"). This content is interpreted and
> displayed as raw text in the Wireshark subtree for the payload/information of
>
