ANNOUNCEMENT: Live Wireshark University & Allegro Packets online APAC Wireshark Training Session
April 17th, 2024 | 14:30-16:00 SGT (UTC+8) | Online

Wireshark-users: Re: [Wireshark-users] Packet List Display

From: "Tony Fortunato" <2008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 19:19:18 -0400
It would be very helpful if the IP dissector behaved the same way.  Sniffer,
Fluke and all the other analyzers can display the IP info and is very
helpful.

I'll take your advice and file an enhancement request on
http://bugs.wireshark.org

Cheers

-------------------------------------------------------
Tony Fortunato, Sr Network Specialist 
The Technology Firm 
905 702-0108
www.thetechfirm.com
Getting things to work better - bit by bit- 
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Sake Blok [mailto:sake@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:17 AM
To: 2008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Community support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] Packet List Display

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 09:16:36AM -0400, Tony Fortunato wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> Just wondering if anyone has either figured out, or can tell me if its 
> possible to change the Packet List Display to show IP as the displayed 
> protocol.
> 
> Just to clarify;
> - I wanted to see (and ideally export) the Packet List with the IP 
> info as the displayed protocol, even if Wireshark can decode the higher
protocols.

If I understand you correctly you want the Info column to display the values
as if IP was the last layer that was dissected by Wireshark?

I thought that would be possible to achieve by disabling all protocols and
then enabling only Ethenet and IP. But unfortunately the IP dissector then
just displays: "TCP (0x06)". 

When I disable the HTTP dissector, the Info Column will indeed show the TCP
info like there was no upper layer present.

Do you want the IP dissector to behave in the same manner? 
(ie showing IP details in the Info Column when the upper layer protocol
dissectors are disabled)

If so, could you file this as an enhancement request on
http://bugs.wireshark.org?

Cheers,
     Sake