A pure netmask (without an associated address) is representable as just a UINT8. Would it be terrible to write `protocolXYZ.netmask == 24`?
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:59 PM, <mman...@netscape.net> wrote: > There's a discussion in a patch review > (https://code.wireshark.org/review/10438/), that I think should get more > visibility. > > The question is "should an IPv4 netmask field be its own fieldtype?" The > main problem being that netmasks are being treated as IPv4 fields and are > attempted to be named resolved, which shouldn't be. The original patch > created an "IPv4_MASK" field type to handle this. Recent discussions about > field types (on this mailing list and other patch reviews) have consistently > resulted in new "display types" being created over new field types. > Following this, I amended the original patch to use a "display type" instead > of a field type. The argument for the field type by the original patch > author (Jeffrey Smith, CCed here in case he's not on -dev) is: > > "... the display filter "protocolXYZ.netmask == 10.0.0.1/24" is currently > valid but semantically makes no sense. Also, I think "protocolXYZ.netmask > == /24" does make sense but does not work. This change makes the sensible > thing happen in those cases, but a display-only change would not have the > same effect." > > I'm not familiar enough with using this filter notation or know how popular > it is to know how much this impact should be considered. But I know there > are others on the list that may have stronger and more educated opinions. > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > 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 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
