Ketan Talaulikar <[email protected]> wrote: > Proposal looks good to me. The only point to clarify is that this info > would need to be there in the specification/reference provided. I would > expect that at least the size of the DLT header (if fixed) is required for > parsing. If size is not fixed then the specification for parsing is > required? If this is not provided then I would wonder how TCPDUMP and other > implementations using these types would be able to parse.
The DE isn't going to mess with the specification itself. The DE is simply going to ask that these questions are as well stated as possible in whatever specification is provided. In general, there are many DLTs for which there are no public parsers, and even more which *tcpdump* does not have code at all to decode. Yes, there is an undesireable gap here, but it's not a new gap. -- Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
