On Saturday, August 16, 2003, at 9:07 PM, Erwin Rol wrote:
Perhaps, instead, the RT-Net dissector should register a dissector
table
to be used with RTNET_TYPE_ values, and the IP and ARP dissectors
should
register themselves in that table.
Isn't that the wrong way around, cause IP/ARP don't know they are
encapsulated in RTNET (or what ever ) ? Or am i miss understanding
something here.
IP and ARP don't necessarily "know" that they're encapsulated in
Ethernet packets, or ARCNet packets, or PPP packets, or..., either, but
they register themselves with the Ethernet, ARCNet, etc. dissectors.
If it were the responsibility of the low-level dissector to register
upper-level dissectors, that'd require you to change the Ethernet
dissector, for example, whenever a new protocol running atop Ethernet
were added; doing the registration in the dissector being added means
the dissector(s) for the protocol(s) atop which it runs don't have to
be modified.
Perhaps the *best* solution is to have all dissectors register
themselves by name (which, for at least some protocols running atop
TCP, for example, means there are two dissectors registered, as the
over-TCP dissector is different from the other dissector) and have a
text file that specifies dissector registration.
If there were only a global text file, installed as part of Ethereal,
then if that file were edited by a user - which would be a nice way to,
for example, change the set of UDP or TCP or SCTP ports used by some
protocol - either
1) their changes would be lost in an upgrade or re-install
or
2) we'd have to merge the two files, so that user changes weren't lost
*AND* new registrations in a new release weren't lost.
If we also have a per-user file, then we'd have to figure out how to
make that file override the system file *WITHOUT* losing any new port
bindings you get in a new release.
