Wireshark · Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Use of NO_PORT2 for dissecting conversations

[Dinesh G Dutt <ddutt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the clarification. What about the fix ? Would you like me to submit
it ? 

Dinesh
Guy Harris writes:
 > On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 02:59:11PM -0700, Dinesh G Dutt wrote:
 > > On a separate note, I couldn't figure out why we have two sets of similar
 > > #defines, NO_ADDR2/NO_PORT2 and NO_ADDR_B/NO_PORT_B.
 > 
 > So that people don't think that the first and second address arguments
 > and port arguments to "conversation_new()" are in any way connected with
 > the first and second address arguments and port arguments to
 > "find_conversation()" (I think, a while ago, somebody writing some
 > dissector code *did* think that, and got confused, so I renamed the
 > arguments and the flags so that they're "addr{1,2}" and "port{1,2}" in
 > "conversation_new()" and "addr_{a,b}" and "port_{a,b}" in
 > "find_conversation()").
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > Ethereal-dev mailing list
 > Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
 > http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
 > 

-- 
Become the change you want to see in the world - Gandhi