Hi,
Could someone review the patch I sent in about two weeks ago, it
looks like it has been overlooked.
Thanks,
Sake
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 07:49:16PM +0200, Sake Blok wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is anyone reviewing the patch I sent last week?
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Sake
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 11:43:25AM +0200, Sake Blok wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > At the moment I'm looking into a problem that James Small has reported
> > on the users-list:
> >
> > http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users/200704/msg00047.html
> >
> > Although the problem seems to be a non-functional re-assembly of
> > the SSL packets when they are proxied. I will take some time to
> > get familiar with the re-assembly code in wireshark...
> >
> > While looking into the http-dissector I improved a few things on
> > how it dissects a proxy CONNECT session. This is what I have changed:
> >
> > - added the fields hf_http_proxy_connect_host and -port
> >
> > - changed proto_tree_add_text to proto_tree_add_string and -uint
> > so that it's possible to filter on them
> >
> > - make these two fields "PROTO_ITEM_SET_GENERATED"
> >
> > - removed the alteration of the ports within pinfo, now the
> > ports in the column info are not changed to the port used to
> > connect to the backend server. It is now possible to use
> > follow-tcp-stream again on proxied ssl sessions.
> >
> > The patch has been tested on FC4.
> >
> > Could someone review this patch?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >
> > Sake
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wireshark-dev mailing list
> > Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-dev mailing list
> Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
