On 6 November 2012 20:26, Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 12:14:31PM +0000, Alex Bennee wrote:
>> We use a fairly simple ATM over Ethernet encapsulation for linking old
>> ATM based circuits with modern Ethernet based hardware.
>
> Googling for 0x8884 I has found that it's already defined as
> ETH_P_ATMFATE (full name: Frame-based ATM Transport over Ethernet)
Oh noes, ID clash ;-0
I'm not sure if the choice of ethertype was deliberate, it's lost in
the mists of time for the atmoe driver I'm using.
>
> and there's some specification at
> http://www.broadband-forum.org/ftp/pub/approved-specs/af-fbatm-0139.001.pdf
>
> Is this the same protocol?
It looks similar but in our case no. Although the packing is the same
FATE adds some additional functionalities.
> If yes maybe dissector should be called FATE rather than ATMoE?
I suspect a separate FATE dissector would look pretty similar except
for the message handling.
--
Alex, homepage: http://www.bennee.com/~alex/
http://www.half-llama.co.uk
