Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Undissected reserved fields
From: Jeff Morriss <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:36:50 -0500
+1

On 02/27/15 14:04, [email protected] wrote:
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 <[email protected]>
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <[email protected]>
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?