Ethereal-dev: RE: [Ethereal-dev] Questions about the X.411 dissector

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 This list is no longer active.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: "Graeme Lunt" <graeme.lunt@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:45:14 +0100
Stig,

> 1. The X.411 defines PerMessageIndicators as shown below, but
>     dissect_ber_bitstring() only handles Universial.
>     Why is this sanity check?

I don't know why this sanity check is there - but X.411 has exercised the
ASN.1 dissector quite a bit.
The captures I have haven't set PerMessageIndicators - but I'll try and
generate one and check it out. I imagine it is a fairly easy fix.

> 2. The X.411 defines ExtensionField as shown below, but when the value
>     is a PriorityLevelQualifier (or any other private-extension) I get
>     "Set Of expected but Class:0 PC:0 Tag:10 was unexpected" in
>     dissect_ber_set() / dissect_ber_sq_of() because they only handles
>     Universial tags.  Why do I get "Set Of expected" and not something
>     like "Dissector for OID:1.3.26.0.4406.0.8.0 not implemented"?

It is a bug in the dissector. I had already spotted this and have a patch
but have not yet submitted it. 
I've also done a number of tidyups including string representations of DNs
(as LDAP) and ORAddresses which make things much more readable. 

>     PriorityLevelQualifier ::= ENUMERATED {
>          lev0 (0),
>          lev1 (1) }

I actually have PLQ as low(0) and high(1) from S4406 Ed2.

> 3. Any plans for implementing extended bodyparts?
>     (OID 2.6.1.4.*/2.6.1.11.* and OID 1.3.26.0.4406.0.7.*)

I have added support for FTBP (2.6.1.4.12/2.6.1.11.12) (as a separator
dissector) since the last release and plan to do the others in time. If you
have a preference, feel free to let me know or submit your own patches.

Thanks for the feedback,

Graeme