https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6859
--- Comment #2 from Josip Medved <jmedved@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2012-02-22 16:03:28 PST ---
Hi,
You are correct about MIP-FA-RK and MIP-FA-RK-SPI. Correct codes for those two
are 1506 and 1507 (as defined in 3GPP TS 29.230). I will attach fixed file.
I sent whole files because I wasn't sure what structure of that directory was
supposed to be.
(In reply to comment #1)
> Hi,
> I'm not sure that I agree with the spliting of files per appplication, even if
> we do havea bit of that currently, The AVP code namespace is shared per vendor
> ID and most application uses AVP.s used by other applications as well.
> We should probably organise the files per wendor id instead.
> Unfortunatly one needs to add a "dummy"
> <application id="16777251" name="3GPP S6a/S6d"
> uri="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5516.txt?number=5516";>
> </application>
> to get the application id dissected. I'm not sure if the URI should actually
> point to the XML specification where the DTD can be found wireshark does not
> use it however so it does not mather. At a glance:
>
> These looks wrong
> -<avp name="MIP-FA-RK" may-encrypt="yes" vendor-id="TGPP" vendor-bit="must"
> mandatory="must" code="14"> <type type-name="OctetString"/> </avp> -<avp
> name="MIP-FA-RK-SPI" may-encrypt="yes" vendor-id="TGPP" vendor-bit="must"
> mandatory="must" code="61"> <type type-name="Unsigned32"/> </avp>
>
> Patches are normaly better than sending the whole file.
>
> Committed the parts I could make out in revision 41144.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.
