Hello,
Earlier this week I submitted a new dissector for the DRDA / DB2 protocol.
I saw no reaction so far on the mailing list.
Is anyone having a look at it ? (see my post on 26/3).
Thanks.
metatech
>Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 20:37:00 +0200
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: metatech <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 01:27:54AM -0400, James Menzies wrote:
> It would be greatly appreciated it if the following minor patch could
> be applied. This corrects two long standing issues with the Visual
> Networks file type in PPP and ML-PPP environments.
Checked in as SVN revision 21293. Th
On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 12:08:01PM -0600, Bryan Miller wrote:
> Does anyone know whom the current "maintainer" of packet-rpc is?
Basically, the Wireshark core developers take over maintenance of all
dissectors that are submtited along with any other person who volunteers
to help out. No one mu
Steve,
You're right. I created an install package and now I can launch Wireshark.
Thanks for the help. Also thank you, Matthias, for your support.
Ronaldo
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/list
Does anyone know whom the current "maintainer" of packet-rpc is?
Cheers
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:17 AM
To: 'Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org'
Subject: Discrepancies between summary view and details view - rpc dissecto
Right. I run a buildrpm.sh script that essentially encapsulates the
following:
../autogen.sh
../conf.sh
make clean
make rpm-package
The conf.sh script is attached. It disables almost everything
(including gtk2), again as I'm primarily only interested in tshark for
this particular rpm. I attach
Hi List!
I would like to say a big THANK YOU to all the developers involved in
the "virtual warning fix" party of recent days!
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
:-) :-) :-)
I'm very
Gerald Combs wrote:
> The official Windows installers are still built using Visual Studio 6.0.
> I'd like to switch over to Visual C++ 2005 Express Edition before the
> next release. Is there any reason not to do this?
>
Hi Gerald!
I like the idea to switch to MSVC 2005 EE, e.g. this would ma
On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 12:55:55PM +0200, Sebastien Tandel wrote:
> Sake Blok wrote:
> >
> > I did some research to tcp-checksum 0x. This checksum should not
> > appear in tcp-headers. RFC 1624 explains that it can be generated
> > by a (not-so-good) algorythm for incremental updates to the tcp
Hi,
For me the problem was a not NULL terminated string in packet-h263.c.
Best regards
Anders
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Stephen Fisher
Skickat: den 31 mars 2007 05:36
Till: Developer support list for Wireshark
Ämne: Re: [Wireshark-dev]
Hi Sake,
IMO, it would be better to create an expert item associated to this
specific incorrect checksum.
Regards,
Sebastien Tandel
Sake Blok wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I did some research to tcp-checksum 0x. This checksum should not
> appear in tcp-headers. RFC 1624 explains that it can be genera
Hi,
I did some research to tcp-checksum 0x. This checksum should not
appear in tcp-headers. RFC 1624 explains that it can be generated
by a (not-so-good) algorythm for incremental updates to the tcp-checksum
(after NAT for example). The RFC advises systems to validate the
checksum according t
12 matches
Mail list logo
