Wireshark · Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Has anyone seen a recent version of Etherpeek ...

[Jeff Morriss <morriss@xxxxxxxxx>]

Guy Harris wrote:

> On Sep 22, 2003, at 12:11 AM, Richard Sharpe wrote:
>
> > It also claims:
> >
> >     ASN.1, H.225, H.245, H.261, H.323, G.711, G.723, G.728,
> >     G.729, Q.850, Q.931, Q.932, Q.952, Q.953, Q.955, Q.956, Q.957, SAP,
> >     SSDP, SIP
> >
> > Howe many of these are we handling so far?

[...]

> I don't remember what Q.850 is, offhand; we do have a dissector for 
> Q.931, but not the other Q. protocols (unless there's nothing to 
> dissect, or if they're just small addenda to other protocols and we 
> already handle those addenda).

Looking at this thread:

http://www.ethereal.com/lists/ethereal-dev/200302/threads.html#00038


and this patch (which was checked in with some changes):

http://www.ethereal.com/lists/ethereal-dev/200302/msg00190.html


Ethereal supports Q.850--although it's not a protocol.

(Should "packet-isup.c" reference the fact that it's compliant to Q.850?)