Wireshark · Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Back to performance...

[Ian Schorr <ethereal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Is there any reason why gtk/rpc_progs.c, gtk/h225_ras_srt.c, and 
gtk/h225_counter.c use reddisect_packets() instead of retap_packets()?  
Noting the comment in h225_ras_srt.c, it appears someone's already made 
this observation about one of these files (I'm guessing Guy =).

If there's no good reason can we change them please?

Thanks,
Ian

On Jul 23, 2004, at 7:46 PM, Guy Harris wrote:

> Ian Schorr said:
> > In the other direction, is there any reason that the packet list needs
> > to be rebuilt every time a new tap listener is added or changed in 
> > some
> > way?
>
> Definitely not, at least in some cases, which is why I created
> "retap_packets()" and made the tap code use it in some places - it 
> doesn't
> rebuild the packet list, it just redissects the packets (and doesn't 
> even
> bother building the protocol tree if there are no tap filters).