|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > wireshark-dev archives|
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Sake Blok <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 1 okt 2010, at 20:35, Fulko Hew wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Sake Blok <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Could you please open a bug report at http://bugs.wireshark.org and
> attach the two tracefiles so that we don't lose track of it?
> > Done, bugzilla entry #5269 submitted.
> > https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5269
> Thanks, this will prevent it from being forgotten.
> I just checked in a partial fix. Now the packets in your trace are indeed
> decoded, however, there are still some problems with the dissection, so I
> will leave the bug open until that is fixed too.
I looked at the src for that dissector, and I found that the enumerations
for the bit mask for the flags field
were all 'off-by-one' and that the endian-ess macro was there and used in
By shifting the mask enumerations, I got the dissector to work, but I didn't
check the details.
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <email@example.com>