Re: [Wireshark-dev] ip.addr != 10.0.0.1 (Guy Harris)

[Gerald Combs]

Stephen Fisher wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:52:11AM -0800, Gerald Combs wrote:
>> Stig Bjørlykke wrote:
>>> 2008/1/30, Gerald Combs <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>>> >:
>>>
>>> The attached patch warns the user about "!=" and "ne" by coloring
>>> the filter
>>> entry yellow and adding a message to the status bar any time either
>>> of those
>>> tokens are present. It's a bit less obtrusive than popping up a dialog.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, this is very intuitive even when the user forget why != can give 
>>> wrong results.
>> It's been checked in.
> 
> A few comments:
> 
>  - The statusbar warning is not displayed while a live capture is in progress
>  - When you point to the filter entry field, there is no mention of what 
> yellow means
>  - The statusbar message should probably mention to check a certain 
> place in the user's guide for more explaination

I finally got around to fixing the first and third items. Stig fixed the second 
one a while back.
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev

Re: [Wireshark-dev] LDAP GUID display bug?

[Lars Friedrichs]

Hi Kaul,

that is simply network byte order vs. host byte order. on the network
all numbers are transfered big endian style so the most significant byte
is always the last byte. If you look closer you will notice it's just
turned around.

Bye
Lars

Kaul schrieb:
> Running 0.99.7, on Windows, capturing Active Directory LDAP
> communication, there's some wrong display of GUIDs (object type
> objectGUID). For example, what on the wire looks like (hex) 25 ff 7e
> 7d 1a f2 a2 49... should be 7d7eff25-f21a-49a2-... (I think the rest
> is like the wire). However, I see that on the search request, even
> though on the wire it is the same, it is printed as 25:ff:7e:7d;1a:f2:
> Am I correct to assume it is because the assertionValue print naively
> prints the data, with disregard to its actual content?
> In the reply, as the item is indeed dissected as a GUID, it is
> displayed properly.
>
> TIA,
> Y.
> 
>
> ___
> Wireshark-dev mailing list
> Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
>   

___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev

Re: [Wireshark-dev] WLAN Traffic Statistics

[Tyson Key]

Hi Stig. Just tried the new SVN version, and the WLAN Traffic stats option
seems very useful.

Thanks.

On Feb 12, 2008 2:19 PM, Stig Bjørlykke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi.
>
> I have just added "Statistics->WLAN Traffic..." with some basic
> wireless traffic statistics.  Have a look at revision 24310, and
> please tell me if I have misunderstood something or if you have
> enhancement requests.
>
> Later I will add more detailed statistics for each network, connected
> hosts, amount of data etc.
>
>
> --
> Stig Bjørlykke
> ___
> Wireshark-dev mailing list
> Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
>



-- 
Fight Internet Censorship! http://www.eff.org
  ~
Open-Source Community, and Technology Testbed: http://www.house404.co.uk/
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev

[Wireshark-dev] WLAN Traffic Statistics

[Stig Bjørlykke]

Hi.

I have just added "Statistics->WLAN Traffic..." with some basic
wireless traffic statistics.  Have a look at revision 24310, and
please tell me if I have misunderstood something or if you have
enhancement requests.

Later I will add more detailed statistics for each network, connected
hosts, amount of data etc.


-- 
Stig Bjørlykke
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev

[Wireshark-dev] LDAP GUID display bug?

[Kaul]

Running 0.99.7, on Windows, capturing Active Directory LDAP communication,
there's some wrong display of GUIDs (object type objectGUID). For example,
what on the wire looks like (hex) 25 ff 7e 7d 1a f2 a2 49... should be
7d7eff25-f21a-49a2-... (I think the rest is like the wire). However, I see
that on the search request, even though on the wire it is the same, it is
printed as 25:ff:7e:7d;1a:f2:
Am I correct to assume it is because the assertionValue print naively prints
the data, with disregard to its actual content?
In the reply, as the item is indeed dissected as a GUID, it is displayed
properly.

TIA,
Y.
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev