We're now a non-profit! Support open source packet analysis by making a donation.

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

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

From: Ian Schorr <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:45:27 -0400
Lars Roland wrote:

Ian Schorr wrote:

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 =).
I don't see any reason not to replace redissect_packets() by retap_packets() for the h225 taps. I just tested it with my tracefiles and I do not see any problem. I guess it can be replaced in rpc_progs.c , too, but someone should verify.
I didn't see any logical reason not to change.  Doing so definitely 
doesn't change anything for the variety of onc-rpc traces/protocols that 
I have, my opinion is that it should be changed.