Huge thanks to our Platinum Members Endace and LiveAction,
and our Silver Member Veeam, for supporting the Wireshark Foundation and project.

Ethereal-users: Re: [Ethereal-users] pcap: File has 4294949296-byte packet, bigger than maximum

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 This list is no longer active.

From: Stef <stefmit@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:59:50 -0600
Have you tried editcap
(http://www.ethereal.com/docs/man-pages/editcap.1.html), "forcing"
various option for output, using the "-F", then trying to open the
resultant file? I have had a similar problem, but in the opposite
direction: file captured with tcpdump (under Linux, if that matters at
all), which I had to analyze, but would not open in OPNET, though it
would work just fine in tethereal. Ran it through editcap, with the
"-F libpcap" (!), and the output file was just fine in OPNET. Go
figure!

HTH,
Stef


On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:36:39 -0500, Stephen Youndt
<syoundt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Forgive me if this is documented somewhere, but I've been googling for a
> couple of days without finding anything applicable.
> 
> I get the above mentioned message whenever I try to open a tcpdump
> capture file on SPARC Solaris hosted ethereal.  The files open without
> any problem in windows and linux, so it's not file corruption. In fact,
> the same files work with tcpdump on the SPARC box. A similar message (a
> different numeral) is displayed if I try to save a capture from within
> ethereal even though the capture seems to work.
> 
> I can capture valid files with tethereal, but can't read them back with
> [t]ethereal on SPARC. They work fine on x86 systems, though, and within
> tcpdump on SPARC.
> 
> I've tried a couple different versions of Ethereal and libpcap including
> direct downloads from SunFreeware, so my software build skills aren't
> the common variable.
> 
> I suspect an alignment or endian problem, but I don't have enough
> experience with the source to even begin to debug it.
> 
> Has anybody else seen this, and perhaps have a workaround or patch?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Stephen
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ethereal-users mailing list
> Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users
> 
> 
> 
>