> I'd have to plow through the SMB documentation I have to see if it's
> forbidden to send out a request with a given MID if you've already
> gotten back a response to a request with that MID
As far as I can tell, it's not.
> There are two separate problems with Ethereal; the patch I sent out
> fixes the first problem, i.e. misdissecting an "interim reply" to a
> TRANSACTION request,
A fix for that problem has been checked in.
> but the duplicate MID issue is a separate problem,
> which requires a separate fix in Ethereal.
A fix for that problem has been checked in as well (along with a number
of other cleanups to the LANMAN pipe dissection code).
> The fix to the first problem happens to cover up the second problem in
> that particular capture, as it means that Ethereal doesn't try to
> dissect the second packet as a particular type of transaction, although
> it probably really should call the "Lanman pipe" dissector with some
> indication that it's an interim response, so that the Lanman pipe
> dissector can at least say what kind of request it's an interim response
> *to*.
The fix I checked in for the first problem *does* call the LANMAN pipe
dissector with such an indication, and the LANMAN pipe dissector does
indicate, in the protocol tree, the type of request to which the
response is an interim response, so it doesn't cover up the second
problem.
The fix for the second problem fixed some other problems as well.
