Ethereal-dev: RE: [Ethereal-dev] WTAP_ENCAP_FRELAY
Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.
From: "Nisbet, Tom" <Tnisbet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 22:47:03 -0400
Ethereal and Sniffer are both handling the traffic correctly. The frames have the lsb of the first octet set. This is defined as the extended address bit, normally indicating the end of the frame relay header. Ethereal checks this and stops decoding the header and starts on the payload. Someone at the frame relay forum eventually noticed that there is no such thing as a one octet frame relay address field, so they stole this bit in the first octet to indicate frame relay fragmentation, as defined in FRF.12. The Sniffer is trying to decode this. It appears as though the traffic is really using a two octet address field but is setting the EA bits incorrectly. If you ignore the EA bits and treat the headers as two octets, you get IP traffic using the common ethertype encapsulation. I've enclosed an example trace below that ignores the EA bits. Is it possible that the router or other frame relay equipment is building the frames incorrectly? Other than the EA bits, they look fine. They are not valid FRF.12 frames. Tom ============================= Frame Number 2025 ============================= Frame source = (User) Length = 87 Time received = 11/12/2003 05:48:50.068 Frame Relay Header = 0x0f00 0000 11.. 0000 .... = DLCI 48 .... ..1. .... 000. = (Response) EtherType = 0x0800 IP Internet Protocol (IP) Source address = 172.25.160.200 Destination address = 172.25.1.203 Type of service = 0x00 Length = 83 Identification = 0x524d Flags = 0x0000 (May fragment, Last fragment) Time to live = 29 Protocol = 17 UDP User Datagram Protocol (UDP) Source Port = 161 SNMP Destination Port = 1055 Data Length = 63 Checksum = 0xe593 Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) Community = public getResponse Request ID = 292520 Error Status = OK 1.3.6.1.4.1.5596.10.3.2.1.0 = OctetStr (len=9) "VideoConf" > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Foster [mailto:jfoste@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 6:30 PM > To: 'Guy Harris'; Marc Carbones > Cc: Jeff Foster; Ethereal development > Subject: RE: [Ethereal-dev] WTAP_ENCAP_FRELAY > > > > It's even worse, I tried to open the capture with Sniffer 4.2 > and it doesn't > understand the file. It decodes the first two bytes as Frame Relay > Fragmentation > and show the third and fourth byte as the Frame Relay > addressing. Even then > the address decode displays an error. > > Jeff F> > > > From: Guy Harris [mailto:gharris@xxxxxxxxx] > > > Marc Carbones said: > > > The Ethereal can see the FR packets but no the IP > information inside, > > > this is my problem. > > > > The problem is twofold: > > > > 1) it's using DLCI 0, which the Frame Relay dissector currently > > interprets as LAPF; > > > > 2) it *looks* as if the payload begins with a zero pad > byte followed > > by an Ethernet type (or Cisco HDLC type), which isn't an > encapsulation > > format Ethernet knows about. > > > > *** > The information in this e-mail is confidential and intended > solely for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. > If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the > sender by return e-mail, delete this e-mail, and refrain from > any disclosure or action based on the information. > *** > > _______________________________________________ > Ethereal-dev mailing list > Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev >
- Prev by Date: Re: [Ethereal-dev] 0.10.5 soon?
- Previous by thread: RE: [Ethereal-dev] WTAP_ENCAP_FRELAY
- Next by thread: [Ethereal-dev] Light modifications in Makefile.nmake
- Index(es):