BTW, I think you should propose these as new IDB options on the pcapng-format mailing list. They're obviously generally useful things to have in the file, no matter how wiretap is implemented.
-hadriel On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Guy Harris <g...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > > We might also have to add new options to the IDB to handle: > > interfaces having separate "friendly name" and "description" strings > (which we should do *anyway*), the "friendly name" being a description of > what the interface is from the user's point of view and the "description" > being a description of the hardware (or, for non-hardware interfaces, > software) corresponding to the interface; > > the MTU of the interface; > > a GUID for the interface (at least on Windows; it'd be nice if every > OS generated an unchanging GUID for each interface, as I'm sure Jasper > Bongertz would agree, but they don't); > > gateway, DHCP server, and DNS server IPv4 and IPv6 addresses; ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
