https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5279
--- Comment #11 from Sake <sake@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-12-22 12:42:45 PST ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > I implemented option 1 in revision 35244.
> >
> > Chris, could you check whether this indeed provides enough flexibility for
> > (un)marking sets of packets?
>
> Thanks Sake! The new mark/unmark behavior makes a lot more sense now and I
> think it provides all the flexibility needed.
You're very welcome!
> If that ever changes
> (i.e., ignored packets that also match a display filter show up as <Ignored>,
> then I think it would make sense to change it similarly. Until then, closing
> the bug as fixed. Thanks again.
Well, the whole point of ignoring packets is to prevent them from being
dissected. I use it mostly when there is the same traffic on two vlans. This
breaks TCP analysis as each packet is seen twice. Selecting all packets from
one vlan and ignoring all of those returns TCP analysis for the other vlan :-)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
