Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Undissected reserved fields

[mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

What I've done is usually setup a FT_UINT32 and/or a FT_BYTES (with different abbreviations) and that's usually inclusive enough (maybe if I'm feeling generous setup a FT_UINT8 though FT_UINT32).  If dissectors only have FT_UINT8 "reserved" fields, then I just add that.  But I rarely look to give each reserved field a unique name.

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Graham Bloice <graham.bloice@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Fri, Feb 27, 2015 1:43 pm
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Undissected reserved fields

How do we handle the case where a protocol has many reserved fields, do they each need an hf and a name?

--

Graham Bloice

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent
via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives:   
http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
            
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe