<mmann78@...> writes:
> Perhaps all checksum validations could be an enumeration of
> "-1" (or "2"?) - unknown/disabled
> "0" - good
> "1" - bad
The TCP dissector does something similar for the window scaling factor. If
the 3-way handshake isn't captured, then the scaling factor is unknown and
set to -1. So, there is some precedence at indicating unknown values using
-1, and if changes are to be made, then -1 would be my vote.
> If we're already going to take a hit with changed display filter names in
the name of consistency, why not go all the way?
I like consistency, so it's fine by me. Just my 2 cents though.
Removing the bad_checksums does have at least 1 drawback though, and that's
that several of them are used in default coloring rules, so if they're
removed, users will likely end up with several warnings of the form:
Warn Could not compile color filter "Checksum Errors" from saved filters:
"<protocol>.checksum_bad" is neither a field nor a protocol name.
