On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 10:54:44AM -0800, Kevin Steves wrote:
| On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 08:36:34AM +0100, Hannes Gredler wrote:
| : well the correct thing would then be:
| :
| : 1. embrace .SFP into Flags [.SPF],
| : 2. add commas to sep. the rest of the field
|
| I don't see commas (in general)
On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 08:36:34AM +0100, Hannes Gredler wrote:
: well the correct thing would then be:
:
: 1. embrace .SFP into Flags [.SPF],
: 2. add commas to sep. the rest of the field
I don't see commas (in general) adding to readability of fields
when you have 'field-name value' or when pos
well the correct thing would then be:
1. embrace .SFP into Flags [.SPF],
2. add commas to sep. the rest of the field
/hannes
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 07:25:07PM -0800, Kevin Steves wrote:
| On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 11:42:48PM +0100, Hannes Gredler wrote:
| : can you re-explain your concern ?
| : w
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 11:42:48PM +0100, Hannes Gredler wrote:
: can you re-explain your concern ?
: we use the comma here as a means of seperating
: fields suitable to human-processors.
3 main issues:
0) not consistent with rest of tcp output (no commas used)
1) distracts from output (e.g., see
commas aren't used in tcp fields so remove these that are
before and after cksum.
Index: print-tcp.c
===
RCS file: /tcpdump/master/tcpdump/print-tcp.c,v
retrieving revision 1.126
diff -u -r1.126 print-tcp.c
--- print-tcp.c 2 Nov 2006