Re: [tcpdump-workers] Tcpdump time discrepancy (vs ethereal/tcptrace)

2004-07-23 Thread Guy Harris
On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 09:21:36PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote: > > "Guy" == Guy Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Guy> If that's still valid, we should probably have it set > Guy> "thiszone" to "gmt2local(time stamp of first packet)" after > Guy> reading, but before processi

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Tcpdump time discrepancy (vs ethereal/tcptrace)

2004-07-22 Thread Michael Richardson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > "Guy" == Guy Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Guy> If that's still valid, we should probably have it set Guy> "thiszone" to "gmt2local(time stamp of first packet)" after Guy> reading, but before processing, the first packet, so the offset

Re: [tcpdump-workers] Tcpdump time discrepancy (vs ethereal/tcptrace)

2004-07-22 Thread Guy Harris
On Jul 22, 2004, at 1:47 PM, Aaron Mitchell wrote: I've noticed a peculiar behavior. Given the same hand-crafted dump file (with an intended time of 5:36 on Jan 1, 1970), tcpdump reports a time of 6:36 for default output, and a time of 10:36 when run with the - option ("supposedly" same time w

[tcpdump-workers] Tcpdump time discrepancy (vs ethereal/tcptrace)

2004-07-22 Thread Aaron Mitchell
I've noticed a peculiar behavior. Given the same hand-crafted dump file (with an intended time of 5:36 on Jan 1, 1970), tcpdump reports a time of 6:36 for default output, and a time of 10:36 when run with the - option ("supposedly" same time with date info prepended). Both ethereal and tcptra