Thanks Guy and Joerg,
I will try with 0.99.3 then.
Sam
wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 02:09:47 +0100 (BST)
From: Sada Mita
Subject: [Wireshark-users] IP Data checksum
To: wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <20060822010947.61413.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello,
I'm seeing that VRRPv6 checksum is incorrect.
Is this because of sniffer tool(ethreal 0.10.11 for linux)? Or
problem at VRRPv6 of sender ?
I just couldn't find any info how the checksum calculation for non-TCP packets is handled by ethereal. I mean I know that ethereal can set enable/disable for TCP checksum calcuation.
Any information would be appreciated!!
Sam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users/attachments/20060822/affccd70/attachment.html
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:04:15 -0700
From: Guy Harris
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] IP Data checksum
To: Community support list for Wireshark
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On Aug 21, 2006, at 6:09 PM, Sada Mita wrote:
> I'm seeing that VRRPv6
checksum is incorrect.
> Is this because of sniffer tool(ethreal 0.10.11 for linux)? Or
> problem at VRRPv6 of sender ?
>
> I just couldn't find any info how the checksum calculation for non-
> TCP packets is handled by ethereal. I mean I know that ethereal
> can set enable/disable for TCP checksum calcuation.
Try the current version of Wireshark; there might have been a bug in
earlier versions. If there's still a bug in the current version, ask
again.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:34:34 +0200
From: Joerg Mayer
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] IP Data checksum
To: Community support list for Wireshark
Message-ID: <20060822103434.GB5709@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 07:04:15PM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> Try
the current version of Wireshark; there might have been a bug in
> earlier versions. If there's still a bug in the current version, ask
> again.
A bug was recently fixed in wireshark svn. So either get a snapshot
build or wait for wireshark 0.99.3 which should be out this week.
ciao
Joerg
--
Joerg Mayer
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-users mailing list
Wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-users
End of Wireshark-users Digest, Vol 3, Issue
23
**********************************************
