Hi everyone
Guy Harris wrote:
> Also, can this be done with the existing tap mechanism, by searching
> for particular fields in the generated protocol tree?
Thanks. Now I have a basic tap working for me, which uses the generated
protocol tree to to get the RPC starting offset and takes it from t
On Mar 4, 2007, at 6:44 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote:
> Thanks. I've been looking at the tap mechanism as a mechanism for the
> anonymizer and I see that we'll have to add calls to
> tap_queue_packet(..) in every packet-nfs.c:dissect_nfs_
> call to queue the message for the tap listener.
No, we won't
Hi
Guy Harris wrote:
> Also, can this be done with the existing tap mechanism, by searching
> for particular fields in the generated protocol tree?
Thanks. I've been looking at the tap mechanism as a mechanism for the
anonymizer and I see that we'll have to add calls to
tap_queue_packet(..) i
Hi
Guy Harris wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2007, at 4:57 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote:
>
>> One drawback of a per-field hook could be that hooks which need a
>> global view or state of the full message might not get access to
>> the needed fields.
>
> Couldn't the private data passed to the hook be used to s
On Mar 1, 2007, at 4:57 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote:
> One drawback of a per-field hook could be that hooks which need a
> global
> view or state of the full message might not get access to the needed
> fields.
Couldn't the private data passed to the hook be used to store the kind
of state neede
Hi
Sebastien Tandel wrote:
> Couldn't we pass one of the fields in the private data?
Firstly, within the per-field hook/callback, the knowledge about what
the current field is ,will be provided by the hfindex arg, assuming the
hook/callback gets called by one of the proto_tree_add functions and
t
Hi,
Couldn't we pass one of the fields in the private data?
Regards,
Sebastien Tandel
> Guy Harris wrote:
>
>> On Feb 21, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote:
>>
>>> It brings in the dissector hooks feature discussed here a few weeks
>>> back. Its a small patch that includes basic
Guy Harris wrote:
> On Feb 21, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote:
>> It brings in the dissector hooks feature discussed here a few weeks
>> back. Its a small patch that includes basic infra for hooks and a
>> sample hook for the NFS dissector.
>>
>> Right now, the hook gets called(..using c
On Feb 21, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Shehjar Tikoo wrote:
> It brings in the dissector hooks feature discussed here a few weeks
> back. Its a small patch that includes basic infra for hooks and a
> sample hook for the NFS dissector.
>
> Right now, the hook gets called(..using call_dissector_hooks().
Hi
That thread is here:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.network.wireshark.devel/3695
Here is my first post about what I am trying to do.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.network.wireshark.devel/3464
Regards
Shehjar
Stephen Fisher wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 01:53:29PM +1100, Shehjar Tikoo wrote
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 01:53:29PM +1100, Shehjar Tikoo wrote:
> It brings in the dissector hooks feature discussed here a few weeks
> back. Its a small patch that includes basic infra for hooks and a
> sample hook for the NFS dissector.
I'm sorry, I don't recall the messages talking about thi
Hi all
Please see the attached diff for the changes I made to revision 20887
from the repository.
It brings in the dissector hooks feature discussed here a few weeks
back. Its a small patch that includes basic infra for hooks and a
sample hook for the NFS dissector.
Right now, the hook ge
12 matches
Mail list logo
