Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Undissected packet bytes
From: Dario Lombardo <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 17:22:23 +0100
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Evan Huus <[email protected]> wrote:

As a side note, I would expect that method to be *very* slow, since it
traverses the entire tree for every byte of the packet. Traversing the
tree once and maintaining a set of covered/uncovered ranges would be
much more efficient.

I can't figure out how to traverse the tree once.