On Jul 21, 2004, at 4:39 AM, John Hawkinson wrote:
Won't this have unfortunate effects on performance (and possibly
storage,
but that's less concerning) for some people in borderline situations?
Only if they're running a version of tcpdump built without IPv6
support. The change wouldn't affect v
In some email I received from John Hawkinson, sie wrote:
> Guy Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 20 Jul 2004
> at 23:21:17 -0700 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > 1) it defines DEFAULT_SNAPLEN as 96 unconditionally, rather
> >than, as is done now, as 68 if INET6 isn't defined and as
Guy Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 20 Jul 2004
at 23:21:17 -0700 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 1) it defines DEFAULT_SNAPLEN as 96 unconditionally, rather
> than, as is done now, as 68 if INET6 isn't defined and as 96
> if it is defined;
>
> The first seems OK to me,
In some email I received from Guy Harris, sie wrote:
> I have some changes to support that.
>
> The main change is to add a "union h6addr" to "tcpdump-stdinc.h", along
> with defintions of IN6_IS_ADDR_UNSPECIFIED, AF_INET6, and NI_MAXHOST if
> they're not defined.
>
> Some side-effects of this:
>
I have some changes to support that.
The main change is to add a "union h6addr" to "tcpdump-stdinc.h", along
with defintions of IN6_IS_ADDR_UNSPECIFIED, AF_INET6, and NI_MAXHOST if
they're not defined.
Some side-effects of this:
1) it defines DEFAULT_SNAPLEN as 96 unconditionally, rather
