Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2

2007-05-31 Thread Stephen Fisher
On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 10:31:50AM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > here is the promised resend of the redback dissector update. For me it > fixes all issues of non decoded packets for me. I have checked in your patch as SVN revision 22018. Thanks! Steve

Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2

2007-05-26 Thread Florian Lohoff
Hi Stephen, here is the promised resend of the redback dissector update. For me it fixes all issues of non decoded packets for me. On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 08:52:07PM -0700, Stephen Fisher wrote: > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2 > > On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 1

Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2

2007-05-18 Thread Stephen Fisher
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 12:40:35PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 01:10:04PM -0700, Stephen Fisher wrote: > > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2 > > > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 03:18:25PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > >

Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2

2007-05-17 Thread Florian Lohoff
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 01:10:04PM -0700, Stephen Fisher wrote: > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2 > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 03:18:25PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > > > Hi, > > here is another round - Now we see ISIS again correctly

Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2

2007-05-08 Thread Stephen Fisher
On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 03:18:25PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > Hi, > here is another round - Now we see ISIS again correctly together with > PPPoE PPP handshakes handed from the Packet Forwarding Asic. Do you want this patch, dated the 17th, applied instea of the one dated the 13th or in ad

[Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update #2

2007-04-17 Thread Florian Lohoff
Hi, here is another round - Now we see ISIS again correctly together with PPPoE PPP handshakes handed from the Packet Forwarding Asic. Please commit. Flo -- Florian Lohoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49-171-2280134 Those who would give up a little freedom to get a li

Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update

2007-04-13 Thread Florian Lohoff
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 02:41:33PM +0200, Luis Ontanon wrote: > Can you gzip the patches, some MUAs (e.g. google mail) mangle the text > attachments in a way that patches become unusable. This patch was send with mutt and send inline. Attached now as gzipped... Will those broken Webmailers please

Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update

2007-04-13 Thread Luis Ontanon
Can you gzip the patches, some MUAs (e.g. google mail) mangle the text attachments in a way that patches become unusable. Luis. On 4/13/07, Florian Lohoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > i took the time to polish the redback dissector a little and decode some > more protocols: > > > Index: e

[Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update

2007-04-13 Thread Florian Lohoff
Hi, i took the time to polish the redback dissector a little and decode some more protocols: Index: epan/dissectors/packet-redback.c === --- epan/dissectors/packet-redback.c(revision 21405) +++ epan/dissectors/packet-redback.c

Re: [Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update vs current svn

2006-09-12 Thread ronnie sahlberg
checked in by the way, it would be nice with a small wiki page for this protocol and possible an example capture for those of us not familiar with this protocol or product On 9/6/06, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > Hi, > after using the redback dissector again i found some more protocol > types: >

[Wireshark-dev] redback dissector update vs current svn

2006-09-06 Thread Florian Lohoff
Hi, after using the redback dissector again i found some more protocol types: Index: epan/dissectors/packet-redback.c === --- epan/dissectors/packet-redback.c(revision 19163) +++ epan/dissectors/packet-redback.c(working copy)