--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 2022-06-20 at 08:34 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Tomasz Moń wrote:
> > On Tue, 2022-06-14 at 10:49 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> >> Tomasz Moń via tcpdump-workers wrote:
> >> > I think I have summed up whole di
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 2022-06-14 at 10:49 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Tomasz Moń via tcpdump-workers wrote:
> > I think I have summed up whole discussion in the libpcap commit
> > message. High-speed and Low-speed are pretty much clear, as these links
>
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 2022-05-10 at 21:31 +0200, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-05-10 at 07:28 +0200, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> > On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 10:17 PM Guy Harris wrote:
> > > It makes sense to indicate whether packets are full-speed or low-
> > > speed; nobody is arguing otherwise.
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 2022-05-10 at 07:28 +0200, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 10:17 PM Guy Harris wrote:
> > On May 9, 2022, at 12:31 PM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> > > It is important that the analysis engine know whether the packets
> > > were
> > > full or low-speed as there are
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 10:17 PM Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 9, 2022, at 12:31 PM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> > There is no such thing as "low-speed bus" because low-speed is only
> > allowed for non-hub devices. USB hosts and hubs *must* support atleast
> > full and high speed. USB
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:57 AM Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 9, 2022, at 9:41 PM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> > Also Wireshark would have to show "USB Full/Low speed capture" section with
> > only the single byte denoting
> > full or low speed, followed by "USB Link Layer" (as shown
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 13:19 -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 9, 2022, at 1:02 PM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
>
> > The same as why URB level captures are confusing. Maybe not to the
> > same
> > level as that would be just a single byte (and the URB metadata
> > contains way more in
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 12:52 -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 9, 2022, at 12:40 PM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 12:02 -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> > > On May 9, 2022, at 7:41 AM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> > >
> > > > That would require defining pseudoheader that
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 12:02 -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 9, 2022, at 7:41 AM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
>
> > That would require defining pseudoheader that would have to be
> > included in every packet.
>
> Is that really a great burden?
I think it would make it harder to und
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 11:52 -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 9, 2022, at 1:58 AM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 9:17 AM Guy Harris
> > wrote:
> > > On May 8, 2022, at 10:47 PM, Tomasz Moń
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Sun, May 8, 2022 at 8:53 PM Guy Harris
> >
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 08:44 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> A capture from a host to a hub with a mix of downstream devices would
> seem to include transmissions at different speeds.
The problem is only when capturing at full-speed where either the host
or hub is full-spee
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 07:47 +0200, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> The problematic case (and the reason why full/low-speed bus is
> mentioned) is the LINKTYPE_USB_2_0_FULL_SPEED. It is the case when
> you capture at the connection between full speed hub and the host
> (and possibly full s
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 2:48 PM Michael Richardson wrote:
> Tomasz Moń via tcpdump-workers wrote:
> Guy> "super-speed" is USB 3.0, right? No LINKTYPE_/DLT_ has been
> Guy> proposed for the 3.0 link layer, as far as I know.
>
> >
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 9:17 AM Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 8, 2022, at 10:47 PM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> > On Sun, May 8, 2022 at 8:53 PM Guy Harris wrote:
> >> At least from a quick look at section 5.2.3 "Physical Bus Topology" of the
> >> USB 2.0 spec, a given bus can either
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 9:21 AM Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 8, 2022, at 11:09 PM, Tomasz Moń wrote:
> > Note that end nodes cannot directly communicate with each other. The
> > communication is always between host and a device.
>
> Those two sentences, when combined, imply tha
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, May 8, 2022 at 11:15 PM Guy Harris wrote:
> On May 8, 2022, at 1:30 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> > I guess I would have thought that a physical bus could have a mix of
> > different devices which operate at different speeds. As such, I wondered if
> > you really
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, May 8, 2022 at 8:53 PM Guy Harris wrote:
> At least from a quick look at section 5.2.3 "Physical Bus Topology" of the
> USB 2.0 spec, a given bus can either be a high-speed bus or a full/low-speed
> bus.
The full/low-speed bus applies only to upstream link from ful
--- Begin Message ---
Hello,
Back in 2019 I have requested Link-Layer Header Type for USB 2.0 [1].
Unfortunately, I didn't foresee the problems with dissecting packets at
effectively "unknown" capture speed. That is, while the host, device
and capture tool were all aware about the speed, the resul
18 matches
Mail list logo
