Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Roofnet Dissector
From: Nicola Arnoldi <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 15:00:18 +0100
I am actually not a wiki-guru, so I can point you to MIT Roofnet
website.
There you will find a lot of info about the system and the source code.
http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/roofnet/doku.php

Can you help me with the problem I cannot decode inner data?
Bye

Il giorno sab, 16/12/2006 alle 14.35 +0100, Jaap Keuter ha scritto:
> Hi,
> 
> That is great. Would you be able to create a roofnet protocol page on the
> Wiki, so everyone can gain insight into this protocol?
> 
> Thanx,
> Jaap
> 
> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, Nicola Arnoldi wrote:
> 
> > Ok guys, the dissector Sebastien sent a few messages ago was perfect.
> >
> > Anyhow, I just can decode the roofnet header, and not the data field
> > contained in it.
> >
> > Can you help me?
> >
> > Nicola
> >
> > Il giorno gio, 14/12/2006 alle 13.18 +0100, Nicola Arnoldi ha scritto:
> > > On lun, 2006-12-11 at 13:01 +0100, Sebastien Tandel wrote:
> > > > Hi Nicola,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >    I've written the first version of the dissector. It only does not
> > > > send data to others dissectors for the moment.
> > > > I've ran it against your capture file and checked some packets.  I've
> > > > seen two roofnet nodes : 5.175.114.207, 5.175.113.111, is it right?
> > > >
> > > >   But ... yes, there is one :) ... see the following
> > > >
> > > > Obviously, roofnet has several ethernet types. It uses at least 0x0641,
> > > > 0x0643, 0x0644 and 0x0645. It seems like if each of these types
> > > > identifies one roofnet packet type.
> > > >
> > > > To what I've seen there are :
> > > > - 2 packets 0x0644 identified as data and broadcasted, one for each node.
> > > > - 1 packet 0x0645 identified as a reply
> > > > - a bunch of 0x0643 packets identified as data ... obviously the TCP
> > > > connection
> > > > - and 4 packets 0x0641 with a roofnet type of *0* which is not possible
> > > > with the definition you provide me
> > > > Is it the query type?
> > >
> > > The EtherType is modified by the Click router, so don't worry about
> > > that. The Hex value would be perfect!
> > > >
> > > > Another thing, looking at the version field. I noticed it was not the
> > > > same for all the packets!
> > > > 0x0643, 0x0644 and 0x0645 = 12
> > > > and again *0x0641* = 4
> > > >
> > > > Furthermore if length data field seems to be correct ... cksum does not
> > > > seem to be computed for each frame :-/
> > >
> > > No, the checksum is not yet computed. Roofnet is still in its infancy
> > > and our implementation is really ... experimental.
> > >
> > > A clarification on the 'next' field.
> > > 'Next field' is an integer which tells which of the N hops has to be
> > > considered the next and is updated at each relaying node.
> > >
> > > Forward is a link metric in the forward direction on a certain link (you
> > > see that this value is present for each link contained in roofnet
> > > header).
> > > The same happens for rev, which is a forward metric.
> > >
> > > NOTE THAT THEY ARE NOT IP ADDRESSES
> > >
> > > NICOLA
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wireshark-dev mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wireshark-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev