On Apr 25, 2014, at 10:02 AM, ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yes. I think in most cases you want to split packet relations up into
> two buckets :
> "packets are related because they form a request/reply (and or cancel) pair"
> and
> "packets are related for some other reason".
>
> We could fix this by changing all request/response fields to a new
> FT_REQUEST_REPONSE type.
"Request/response fields" in the sense of "fields used to match requests and responses" (such as ONC RPC XIDs), or "request/response fields" in the sense of "for a {request,response}, the frame number of the corresponding {response,request}"? If the latter, presumably you mean using FT_REQUEST_RESPONSE (or perhaps FT_MATCHING_REQUEST and FT_MATCHING_RESPONSE) rather than FT_FRAMENUM.
