Wireshark · Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] What should I be using for BER?

["Ronnie Sahlberg" <ronnie_sahlberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

So, anyone interested in starting to packet-berifying  say  the spnego
dissector?
That one is pretty small and there shouldnt be that many instances where
there are missing support
(which also needs to be added) to the BER helpers.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tomas Kukosa"
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 5:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Ethereal-dev] What should I be using for BER?


> Yes, the packet-ber.c is the right future :-).
> But it does not support all possibilities now.
> I have prepared many changes for packet-ber.c but I do not want to send
them into the CVS
> every day. I guess I could send patch into CVS at the end of the next
week.
> If you would like to start writing dissctor now let me know and I can send
you current
> version.
>
> Guy Harris wrote:
>
> > Ronnie Sahlberg said:
> >
> >>I personally prefer the packet-ber.c interface since i think it is much
> >>easier to use
> >>than the asn1.c interface.
> >>
> >>packet-ber.c makes it imo much easier to extract the data and also make
> >>sure everything is assigned a proper display filter
> >>name.
> >
> >
> > ...and, in the long term, I'd like to get everything that currently uses
> > asn1.c to use packet-ber.c and then get rid of asn1.c, so I'd prefer
that
> > people use packet-ber.c for new dissectors.
> >