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

[Dinesh G Dutt <ddutt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Guy Harris writes:
 > Perhaps the issue of whether we're declaring a future connection (i.e.,
 > we know both endpoints in their entirety) or a service offered to a
 > particular host (i.e., we don't know the other side's port number)
 > should be decoupled from the protocol, and all the calls that currently
 > establish wildcarded UDP connections should add that flag.

Deciding that it is a service as opposed to a future connection is one
choice. The problem to me is that it was not obvious that the wildcard would be
removed on a match for a conversation. If I specified a wildcard during setup,
it is either because I don't care or I don't know. Specifying an option such as
NO_PORT2_FORCE was a way of saying "I don't care and I don't wish to". 

 > This also raises the question of whether you want to, instead, have a
 > "prototype" conversation, and, when we get a match, "clone" that
 > conversation, creating a new conversation with completely non-wildcarded
 > endpoints, rather than having a conversation whose second port remains
 > wildcarded.

While the idea is elegant and similar to what is done using sockets, I think
this would be an overkill. 

Please let me know how to proceed,

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