Le ven. 28 juin 2024 à 17:07, Mauro Levra <mauro.le...@viavisolutions.com> a écrit :
> Thanks, Pascal. Yes, of course. This is what I meant. > I completely reversed the order when writing the example by hand. :) > Actually what I wrote is the encoding I'm used to, and that does not match either the rules you defined. Did you mean: [0] MCC digit 2, MCC digit 1 [1] MNC digit 3, MCC digit 3 [2] MNC digit 2, MNC digit 1 Instead of: [0] MCC digit 2, MCC digit 1 [1] MNC digit 1, MCC digit 3 [2] MNC digit 3, MNC digit 2 ? I guess this is the case given the textual description you gave. I would prefer the former (the one following the encoding I gave as an example). Best regards, Pascal. > ________________________________________ > From: Pascal Quantin <pas...@wireshark.org> > Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 17:03 > > This does not seem correct. Using your encoding rules, you should instead > have PLMN: [0] 0x23, [1] 0x71, [2] 0x89 and PLMN: [0] 0x32, [1] 0xF1, [2] > 0x89 which would be the traditional BCD encoding used in 3GPP specs. >
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
