Re: [tcpdump-workers] Printing of TCP flags seems incorrect

2008-07-03 Thread grarpamp
> once a connection is established, there should not be any packets > with no flags set ... not sure when you'd ever see a TCP segment > with no flags set "Packets Found on an Internet" :) The net's full of physical packets that make no logical sense to the viewer. Still have to print them correct

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Printing of TCP flags seems incorrect

2008-07-02 Thread grarpamp
Hi. Patch inline. I conformed the naming to the RFC's and maintained the bitfield order in the man pages. No doubt I missed some parts. The "Nonce Sum" bit was left out as it is still experimental, not standards track. Compiles clean and seems to work. Enjoy. FYI, tcpreplay has problems installing

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Printing of TCP flags seems incorrect

2008-07-02 Thread grarpamp
Hi. I think I've found this 'none' printf you speak of. However it does not appear to be excercised from what I can tell. Not sure about that. However as this code is still in flux [unreleased] and possibly amenable to the influence of sanity, I would like to suggest that the flags field be kept l

[tcpdump-workers] Printing of TCP flags seems incorrect

2008-07-01 Thread grarpamp
Hi. Surely it is not possible to have both 'no flags' and present at the same time? The man page has a few references to the dot, particularly in the 'OUTPUT FORMAT - TCP Packets' example near 'means no flags'. #CVS, the most recent commit I have is: 20080624 #tcpdump version 3.9-PRE-CVS_2008_06