> On 30. Sep 2020, at 04:14, Qin Wu <bill...@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi, two Michaels: > Can you clarify what functionalities is missed for more modern applications? > Since it is enhancement to libpcap, do you expect all the The file format is extensible and allows to include packets from multiple interfaces not having the same physical layer. I can also contain information not related to a particular packet like how many packets where dropped between two packets, how many packets where dropped on which interface during capturing, which capture filters where used, ...
I guess this kind of information could be added to the abstract of the document. > future packet capture tools support the format defined in this draft? For Wireshark it is the default. Best regards Michael > > -Qin > -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Michael Richardson > 发送时间: 2020年9月29日 4:31 > 收件人: Michael Tuexen <tue...@fh-muenster.de>; pcap-ng-for...@winpcap.org; > opsawg@ietf.org; Jasper Bongertz <jas...@packet-foo.com>; > tcpdump-work...@lists.tcpdump.org; Fulvio Risso <fulvio.ri...@polito.it>; Guy > Harris <ghar...@sonic.net>; Gerald Combs <ger...@wireshark.org> > 主题: Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for > draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-02.txt > > > Michael Tuexen <tue...@fh-muenster.de> wrote: >>> internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: >>>> Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng-02 >>> >>> Hi, I have converted the xml to markdown. > >> Why? If we want to publish this, it will be published in xmlv3. So >> better to use that format earlier... > > It's so so so much easier to maintain and update and get contributions. > github will render it directly.... > > If you object strongly, we can stick to XML. > >>> The results in the diff are okay, but actually the conversion is not >>> complete as I cheated and left the tables as preformatted figures, and >>> there are many internal references that I have no yet updated. >>> >>> The xml file had a long list of URLs as references, many of which were >>> duplicated. I will be going through and fixing those in the next week >>> or so. >>> >>> This work has been discussed on and off in OPSAWG, but at this point I >>> am going to suggest that the document just go through the Independant >>> Submission Editor. > >> Do we want to finally publish that? Up to now, I think the point was to >> find a home where it is substantially discussed and improved... > > If we can get OPSAWG to adopt it, great. > I'm just not holding my breath. > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ > ] m...@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails > [ >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
