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

Wireshark-dev: [Wireshark-dev] Wireshark and Matlab

From: Armen Babikyan <armenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:28:25 -0400
Hello,

A few months ago, I wrote a tool that lets me use Wireshark's packet
dissection capabilities in Matlab, to numerically analyze packets.  For
example:

 >> b = tshark_read('ws1.pcap', {'frame.number', 'ip.version',
'tcp.seq', 'udp.dstport', 'frame.pkt_len'}, 'ip.version eq 4')

b =

1x14630 struct array with fields:
     frame_number
     ip_version
     tcp_seq
     udp_dstport
     frame_pkt_len

 >> b(3)

ans =

      frame_number: 6
        ip_version: 4
           tcp_seq: []
       udp_dstport: 9618
     frame_pkt_len: 1042

 >>

With this array of structs, a Matlab programmer could trivially plot
packet fields with respect to time, or whatever.

My code, however, makes use of (among other things) the general
bootstrapping portion of libwireshark's API, and I've run into
compatibility issues between successive versions of Wireshark that have similar, but not identical, bootstrapping APIs. Does the Wireshark project intend to standardize this part of the libwireshark soon?

If the Wireshark is not intending to standardize libwireshark's API
anytime soon, would the developers consider creating #defines for major,
minor, and minorminor numbers for the current version of wireshark, so I
can create preprocessor directives based on these to account for further
changes to the libwireshark API?  For example, I'd like something like this:

#define VERSION "0.99.5" // already exists
#define VERSION_MAJOR 0
#define VERSION_MINOR 99
#define VERSION_MINORMINOR 5

Lastly, is the general public interested in this tool?

Let me know your thoughts.  Thanks!

Armen

--
Armen Babikyan
MIT Lincoln Laboratory
armenb@xxxxxxxxxx . 781-981-1796