Hello Anders,
Here is the fragment from the ASN.1 specification for H.248.
TerminationStateDescriptor ::= SEQUENCE
{
propertyParms SEQUENCE OF PropertyParm,
eventBufferControl EventBufferControl OPTIONAL,
serviceState ServiceState OPTIONAL,
...
}
As I understand, "SEQUENCE OF" means zero or more elements, so it is
possible that there will be no propertyParms at all. So in terms of
ASN.1 the packet is correct and no BER errors should occur. Right?
--
Best regards,
Oleg mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wednesday, September 20, 2006, 12:57:17 AM, you wrote:
AB> Hi,
AB> I think part of the problem is that we are uncertain if this isn't a
AB> protocol error in the stack you are using - zero length items??
AB> Brg
AB> Anders
AB> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
AB> Från: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AB> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Oleg Kostenko
AB> Skickat: den 19 september 2006 20:03
AB> Till: wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
AB> Ämne: [Wireshark-dev] Fwd: And again BER errors while decoding H248packets
AB> Hello,
AB> Is there any progress on this issue (see below)?
AB> --
AB> Best regards,
AB> Oleg mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
AB> This is a forwarded message
AB> From: Oleg Kostenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
AB> To: wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
AB> Date: Tuesday, August 22, 2006, 5:14:59 PM
AB> Subject: And again BER errors while decoding H248 packets
AB> ===8<==============Original message text===============
AB> Hello,
AB> Some time ago Eugene Tarlovskij posted the message about BER errors
AB> while decoding H248 packets. Here are the links to his posts:
AB> http://www.wireshark.org/lists/ethereal-dev/200605/msg01641.html
AB> http://www.wireshark.org/lists/ethereal-dev/200605/msg01723.html
AB> The solution he proposed was to change packet-ber.cpp:
AB> if((len!=0)&&(count==0)&&(seq->flags&BER_FLAGS_OPTIONAL)){
AB> change to:
AB> if((len!=0)&&(count==0)&&(count!=length_remaining)&&(seq->flags&BER_FLAGS_OP
AB> TIONAL)){
AB> (This is currently line number 1222).
AB> However, Eugene's patch was rejected and another patch was proposed
AB> by Tim Endean.
AB> http://www.wireshark.org/lists/ethereal-dev/200606/msg01532.html
AB> Lines 1076-1080:
AB> if(ind_field && (len == 2)){
AB> /* disgusting indefinite length zero length field, what are these
AB> people doing */
AB> offset = eoffset;
AB> continue;
AB> }
AB> This patch is currently checked in, but doesn't work well enough.
AB> Please, take a look at this packet that I've captured (in attach).
AB> Here's a fragment of its decoding:
AB> Item: mediaDescriptor (1)
AB> mediaDescriptor
AB> termStateDescr
AB> BER Error: Wrong field in SEQUENCE expected class:2 (CONTEXT)
AB> tag:0 but found class:2 tag:2
AB> streams: oneStream (0)
AB> oneStream
AB> localControlDescriptor
AB> reserveValue: False
AB> reserveGroup: False
AB> With Eugene's patch this looks like this:
AB> Item: mediaDescriptor (1)
AB> mediaDescriptor
AB> termStateDescr
AB> propertyParms: 0 items
AB> serviceState: inSvc (2)
AB> streams: oneStream (0)
AB> oneStream
AB> localControlDescriptor
AB> reserveValue: False
AB> reserveGroup: False
AB> Would you please review both patches again, to see what's wrong with
AB> them. As for me, the Eugene's patch works just fine, but I don't
AB> actually understand the code well enough to make any conclusions.
AB> Probably, you would be able to make another patch, which would be
AB> better than these two.
AB> Thanks.
AB> Attached is the hex dump of the problematic packet.
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
