Wireshark · Ethereal-dev: [Ethereal-dev] Re: [Ethereal-users] issue with giop syncscope value

[Nicolas.De_Montbel@xxxxxxxxxx]

Yes, I completly agree with you
thanks for providing the patch
regards
Nicolas




Bernd Becker <bb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>@ethereal.com on 11/03/2003 10:26:22

Sent by:  ethereal-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx


To:   Nicolas DE MONTBEL/FR/ALCATEL@ALCATEL, ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:   ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:  Re: [Ethereal-users] issue with giop syncscope value


Hi Nicolas,

I think you are right. We should not map the response_flags to
sync_scope.
The sync_scope defined in packet-giop.c obviously came from the
following definition in Corba Messaging Quality of Service:

typedef short SyncScope;
const SyncScope SYNC_NONE = 0;
const SyncScope SYNC_WITH_TRANSPORT = 1;
const SyncScope SYNC_WITH_SERVER = 2;
const SyncScope SYNC_WITH_TARGET = 3;

We should leave the sync_scope value_string unchanged in case somebody
implements the Messaging module, although that would probably be another
plugin.
We should either just display the numeric value for the response_flags
or maybe display something more like a comment as in the spec, e.g.

static const value_string response_flags[] = {
    { 0x0, "SyncScope NONE or WITH_TRANSPORT" },
    { 0x1, "SyncScope WITH_SERVER"},
    { 0x3, "SyncScope WITH_TARGET"},
    { 0, NULL}
};

I can supply a patch if you (and maybe others) agree.

I don't really know if anybody has looked at the changes in the Corba 3.0
Spec to see what has to be added/changed in packet-giop.c. Some additions
were made regarding Service Contexts a short time ago.

It might be better to ask such questions on the developer list, as I
suspect
that not many of the few giop developers check the users list. I will send
this to the developers list.

Regards,
Bernd

--On Monday, March 10, 2003 17:25:00 +0100 Nicolas.De_Montbel@xxxxxxxxxx
wrote:

> Hello everybody,
> I am new on this tool which seems to be very convenient and complete
> but I have a problem on decoding one giop request header (response
flags).
>
> from CORBA3.0 specification :
> "response_flags is set to 0x0 for a SyncScope of NONE and
> WITH_TRANSPORT. The flag is set to 0x1 for a SyncScope of
> WITH_SERVER. A non exception reply to a request message containing a
> response_flags value of 0x1 should contain an empty body, i.e. the
> equivalent of
> a void operation with no out/inout parameters. The flag is set to 0x3 for
> a SyncScope of WITH_TARGET. These values ensure interworking
compatibility
> between this and previous versions of GIOP."
> In packet-giop.c :
>         static const value_string sync_scope[] = {
>               { 0x0, "SYNC_NONE" },
>               { 0x1, "SYNC_WITH_TRANSPORT"},
>               { 0x2, "SYNC_WITH_SERVER"},
>               { 0x3, "SYNC_WITH_TARGET"},
>               { 0, NULL}};
>
> This is quite different.
>
> Can you confirm that
> and say to me how can I correct that in Ethereal
> sincerly
>
> Nicolas de Montbel
> Alcatel Lannion,France

_______________________________________________
Ethereal-users mailing list
Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users