Re: [Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-23 Thread Ulf Lamping
Francois-Xavier Le Bail schrieb: > --- Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Perhaps it should just be more intelligent, and if >> one port is < 1024 and >> the other isn't, just resolve the one less than >> 1024? >> >> On the other hand that doesn't solve the problem in >> the

Re: [Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-20 Thread Francois-Xavier Le Bail
--- Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote: > > > Hi List, > > > > In version 0.99.6 we have, by example : > > Source Destination Protocol Info > > 10.0.0.2 62.210.65.158 TCP 3946 > http [ACK] > ... > > > > In version 0.99.7-SV

Re: [Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-19 Thread Francois-Xavier Le Bail
--- Andrew Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote: > > --- Andrew Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>It it wasn't for Windows' broken behaviour in > >>letting any port be > >>ephemeral, that might make some sense. > >> > >>I have been forced to set registry values to mak

Re: [Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-19 Thread Andrew Hood
Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote: > --- Andrew Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>It it wasn't for Windows' broken behaviour in >>letting any port be >>ephemeral, that might make some sense. >> >>I have been forced to set registry values to make >>Windows behave more >>like *nix. Reserve all ports belo

Re: [Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-19 Thread Francois-Xavier Le Bail
--- Andrew Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Richard van der Hoff wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Francois-Xavier Le Bail > wrote: > > > > > >>Hi List, > >> > >>In version 0.99.6 we have, by example : > >>Source Destination Protocol Info > >>10.0.0.2 62.210.65.158 TCP 3946 > http [ACK]

Re: [Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-19 Thread Andrew Hood
Richard van der Hoff wrote: > On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote: > > >>Hi List, >> >>In version 0.99.6 we have, by example : >>Source Destination Protocol Info >>10.0.0.2 62.210.65.158 TCP 3946 > http [ACK] ... >> >>In version 0.99.7-SVN-22549 we have : >>Source Destin

Re: [Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-18 Thread Abhik Sarkar
+1 for that idea :) On 8/18/07, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote: > > > Hi List, > > > > In version 0.99.6 we have, by example : > > Source Destination Protocol Info > > 10.0.0.2 62.210.65.158 TCP 3946 > http [ACK] ... >

Re: [Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-18 Thread Richard van der Hoff
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote: > Hi List, > > In version 0.99.6 we have, by example : > Source Destination Protocol Info > 10.0.0.2 62.210.65.158 TCP 3946 > http [ACK] ... > > In version 0.99.7-SVN-22549 we have : > Source Destination Protocol Info > 10.0.0.2 62.2

[Wireshark-dev] About transport name resolution with the new services file

2007-08-18 Thread Francois-Xavier Le Bail
Hi List, In version 0.99.6 we have, by example : Source Destination Protocol Info 10.0.0.2 62.210.65.158 TCP 3946 > http [ACK] ... In version 0.99.7-SVN-22549 we have : Source Destination Protocol Info 10.0.0.2 62.210.65.158 TCP backupedge > http [ACK] ... The resolution from t