On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:13 AM, morriss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=46239
>
> User: morriss
> Date: 2012/11/27 03:13 PM
>
> Log:
> Warn about non-final parameters that aren't padded correctly. I'm not sure
> that final parameters *with* padding is all that important (maybe it should
> be there but not PI_ERROR?).
Do you have an example where the non-final parameter is not padded correctly?
I though this can't happen, so I took the expert warning out. But possibly
I missed a case.
RFC 4960 says regarding the chunk length:
The Chunk Length value does not include terminating padding of the
chunk. However, it does include padding of any variable-length
parameter except the last parameter in the chunk. The receiver
MUST ignore the padding.
Note: A robust implementation should accept the chunk whether or
not the final padding has been included in the Chunk Length.
So I changed the code to make the "except the last parameter in the chunk"
visible. At least this made me aware of a bug in the FreeBSD implementation.
So we should have such an expert info.
Best regards
Michael
>
> Directory: /trunk/epan/dissectors/
> Changes Path Action
> +4 -2 packet-sctp.c Modified
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via: Wireshark-commits mailing list <wireshark-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-commits
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-commits
> mailto:wireshark-commits-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
>
