On Dec 16, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Martin Kaiser <lists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The idea would be to allow filtering for this element although it has no
> value (it's just there).
Do you mean "this is a byte array field that has a length that can range from 0 to {some maximum value}", so that the field might have some value in some packets, or do you mean "I just want to add a flag to a packet, carrying one bit's worth of information by its presence or absence"?
In the latter case, a (computed) FT_NONE or FT_BOOLEAN field would be more appropriate than an FT_BYTES field.
(Or perhaps what you really want is an expert info item.)
