Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] packet-ieee80211.c

[Alexis La Goutte <alexis.lagoutte@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:30 AM, <mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

(sorry about the previous email; trigger happy enter key)

 

While trying to remove decode_numeric_bitfield() calls, I came across some curious code in packet-ieee80211.c.  "hf_ieee80211_block_ack_control_multi_tid_info" and "hf_ieee80211_block_ack_control_compressed_tid_info" both use decode_numeric_bitfield() with a 16-bit mask, yet the proto_tree_add_uint_format() they're wrapped up in only specifies a length of 1 (byte).  Within the hf_ array they are also listed as a FT_UINT16 type.

Also there are a few other hf_ variables within the Multi-TID BlockAckReq and Multi-TID BlockAck handling that have proto_tree_add_* only specifying a length of 1, but the type is FT_UINT16 with a 16-bit mask.  Should these even work?

Hi Michael,
Yes, it is very strange ! (this code need so rework)
This information about this fields have available here
http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.11n-2009.pdf Chapiter 7.2.1.8 BlockAck frame format

 Regards,

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe