> On Aug 4, 2014, at 17:11, Roland Knall <rkn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Evan Huus <eapa...@gmail.com> wrote: 
>> Right now you can't filter on field combinations that must appear "together" 
>> in one of those application frames: if fieldA appears in frame 1, and fieldB 
>> appears in frame 2, then that packet will match "fieldA && fieldB" even if 
>> they never appear "together" in the way a normal human would intend. Being 
>> able to label each of those frames as a separate "record" would solve this 
>> problem.
>>  
> 
> One thing to look out for here is the fact, that this may change behavior of 
> the display filters in a way, the end-user may never see coming. We would 
> have to come up with a syntax in wireshark, where we allow either "(fieldA && 
> fieldB)" meaning, record1.fieldA and record2.fieldB or fieldA and fieldB in 
> the same record. The end-user does not necessarily make that distinction. If 
> he simply selects frame fields, he may end up with display filters which do 
> not filter the intended or any packages, but he has no clue why simply 
> because the display filter interprets the syntax in a way the end-user could 
> not foresee.

Yes, I was thinking some additional syntax like wrapping an expression in {} or 
something to indicate it should only match within a single record.

> On the rest, I see your point.
> 
> regards,
> Roland
>  
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
> Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>             mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to