Re: [Ethereal-dev] Fields and protocols relationships

[Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Stefano,

does this mean that the protocol fields at one layer depend on the 
upper layer but
there is no indication at this layer what the upper layer is? Sounds a 
bit 'special'?
Shouldn't a layer be processable / parseable without knowing its upper 
layer?

Best regards
Michael

On Jan 2, 2005, at 20:52 Uhr, Stefano Pettini wrote:

> LEGO wrote:
>
> > Take a look at packet-ip.c
> > take a look at packet-udp.c:
>
> Thanks. This is a good example of how to chain protocol dissectors, 
> but this doesn't solve my problem.
>
> It's similar to the following: I have to dissect some IP fields only 
> if the higher layer protocol is TCP, and dissection code for these 
> fields is TCP specific. If I have UDP instead of TCP, the dissection 
> code for the same fields is different. And I don't have ip.proto field 
> :-(
>
> Stefano
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ethereal-dev mailing list
> Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev