https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3870
--- Comment #11 from Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-19 11:55:15 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Thanks for the review...
>
> I'll clean up the if (cinfo != NULL) however, I noticed that it is common to
> almost all of the DNS types from T_A to the previous patches that i've
> submitted like T_HIP and T_DHCID. should i take it off from the other types?
This will be addressed in the context of bug 2902. I've added a comment to that
effect.
> I've also read your comment#11 of bug#2902
> " ...just like was done for the proto_tree_add_xxx(tree, ...) where the check
> for tree!=NULL was made obsolete by adding it to the API ... "
>
> should I also remove if (dns_tree != NULL) as well?
While you at it, please do :) . It may even be influencing offset tracking and
error detection when tree==NULL.
> im also thinking of supporting the older rfc 1035 DNS RRs.. to make the DNS
> dissector completely understand all RFC-based DNS RRs. should it be better to
> support non-RFC DNS RR types? http://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-parameters
Well, yes. Wireshark strives to be as complete as possible. What happens in
real life may deviate from what is officially written...
> im planning to submit two patches
> - clean up of dns dissector based on your comments
> - additional dns rr types (the ones above and rfc1035)
>
> thanks!
>
Sounds good.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
