Ethereal-dev: RE: [Ethereal-dev] Patch to packet SIP to make content type lower case, Patch to

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

Date Index Thread Index Other Months All Mailing Lists
Date Prev Date Next Thread Prev Thread Next
From: "Anders Broman (TN/EAB)" <anders.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 09:34:56 +0100
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Olivier Biot [mailto:ethereal@xxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: den 20 januari 2004 00:11
>To: Lars Roland; Anders Broman (TN/EAB)
>Cc: ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Patch to packet SIP to make content type
>lower case, Patch to packet-isup to avoid owerwriting 'SIP' in Proto
>column


>From: "Lars Roland"
>|

>| Hello all,
>|
>| Anders Broman (TN/EAB) wrote:
>| > Hi,
>| > Just to clearify the intent:
>| >
>| > Currently the SDP dissector adds /SDP in the protocoll column e.g
>| > a MEGACO message with SDP descriptions would show up as
>| > MEGACO/SDP in the protocol column, this sort of make sense as SDP
>just decodes
>| > a part of the MEGACO message "written in SDP" the same is true for
>SIP and BICC.
>| >  I was thinking that if there was a SIP message with ISUP ( and
>SDP ) parts included in it
>| > it would make sense to show it as SIP/ISUP/SDP as the "main"
>message still is SIP or perhaps only "SIP" ?
>| >
>| > Currently the message will show "application/ISUP/SDP" ( as SIP is
>owerwritten )at least it should be changed
>| > to "ISUP/SDP" or "ISUP(ITU)/SDP" in my opinion.
>| >
>| > Comments wellcome.
>| >
>|
>| I agree. Subdissectors should not overwrite "SIP" in the protocol
>| column. However I would set the protocol column to "SIP-T" and not
>to
>| "SIP/ISUP", but both solutions are OK.
>
>So tell me what I have to do here :)

Check in the ISUP patch :)),

Seriously: Puting SIP-T in the protocol column isn't so straight forward I think,
( I don't have a SIP-T trace so I don't know how a complete call would look)
as that would have to be dependant on Content type beeing equal to multipart/mixed
and probably would mean that a call sequence would have a mix of "SIP" and "SIP-T/SDP"
( asuming ISUP puts nothing there )entries in the protocol column ?
The alternative would be:
"SIP" and
"SIP/ISUP(ITU)/SDP"

I don't realy have any strong opinion either way.

Best regards
Anders


| BTW, last patch to packet-sip.c introduced a bug. Patch is attached.

The SIP patch has been checked in.

Regards,

Olivier