I agree with Graham, adding the extra objects shouldn't interfere with any of the developments I have cooking up. I myself have been thinking of submitting a patch for a few extra objects in the meantime!
As always, examples of the offending packets are welcome. :)
Chris
> > I have tested Ethereal with DNP3 traffic and believe I have
> found a
> > bug in the DNP3 application layer dissector. In DNP3, READ fragments
> > do not have Information Objects. Only the headers have Information
> > Objects, since they only specify the points to be read, not their
> > value. The response fragment has both the headers and the
> Information> Objects.
> >
> > However the DNP3 application layer dissector is treating READ
> request> fragments as if they do have Information Objects
> following the object
> > headers, and is therefore parsing subsequent object headers
> after the
> > first object header as if they were Information Objects. Should
> I add
> > this to the bugs database?
>
> Yes please. It would help enormously if you could also provide a
> captureillustrating the problem, identifying the frames in question.
>
> >
> > Also what are the development plans for the DNP3 application layer
> > dissector? Is anyone working on it at the moment? Is any assistance
> > required? I am particularly keen to add floating point and file
> > objects.
> >
>
> When time permits.
>
> Chris Bontje and myself seem to be the only folks working on this
> at the
> moment. Chris has some refactorings in progress to sort a few
> issues out,
> but adding extra info objects shouldn't be too difficult. Feel
> free to send
> a patch in, again captures demonstrating the new types would be
> helpful.
> Regards,
>
> Graham Bloice
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ethereal-dev mailing list
> Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
>
