Wireshark · Wireshark-bugs: [Wireshark-bugs] [Bug 2458] Unknown PPPoE TAGs which are present in a PPPoE discovery packet are not

[bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2458


Jewgenij.Bytschkow@xxxxxxxxxxxxx changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|FIXED                       |




--- Comment #4 from Jewgenij.Bytschkow@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  2008-04-17 02:16:15 GMT ---
I checked it with the Wireshark revision 25031.

About info:
Version 1.0.99-SVN-25031 (SVN Rev 25031)
...

Viewing the submitted trace with PPPoE discovery packets of two sessions there
are following problems now in relation to the reported old problems with
"unknown" TAGs. The problems are marked with '!' sign.

PPPoE Discovery Phase (session #1):
-----------------------------------
Frame #1 (PADI):
!   TAG1: TAG_TYPE=0x0101 (Service-Name); TAG_LENGTH=0x0000; TAG_VALUE=<none> 
-known [RFC2516] TAG is NOT displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section (Wireshark
ERR!)
!   TAG2: TAG_TYPE=0x0100 (unknown); TAG_LENGTH=0x0000; TAG_VALUE=<none> 
-unknown/unassigned TAG is NOT displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section (Wireshark
ERR!)

Frame #2 (PADO):
!   TAG1: TAG_TYPE=0x0101 (Service-Name); TAG_LENGTH=0x0000; TAG_VALUE=<none> 
-known [RFC2516] TAG is NOT displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section (Wireshark
ERR!)
!   TAG2: TAG_TYPE=0x0100 (unknown); TAG_LENGTH=0x0000; TAG_VALUE=<none> 
-unknown/unassigned TAG is NOT displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section (Wireshark
ERROR!)
    TAG3: AC-Name (o.k.)
    TAG4: AC-Cookie (o.k.)

Frame #3 (PADR):
!   TAG1: TAG_TYPE=0x0101 (Service-Name); TAG_LENGTH=0x0000; TAG_VALUE=<none> 
-known [RFC2516] TAG is NOT displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section (Wireshark
ERR!)
    TAG2: TAG_TYPE=0x0100 (unknown); TAG_LENGTH=0x0004; TAG_VALUE=0x54657374 
-unknown/unassigned TAG is displayed (o.k.)
    TAG3: TAG_TYPE=0x0104 (AC-Cookie); TAG_LENGTH=0x0010;
TAG_VALUE=0x6FE2...FBB8   -the TAG is displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section
(o.k.)

Frame #3 (PADR):
!   TAG1: TAG_TYPE=0x0101 (Service-Name); TAG_LENGTH=0x0000; TAG_VALUE=<none> 
-known [RFC2516] TAG is NOT displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section (Wireshark
ERR!)
    TAG2: TAG_TYPE=0x0100 (unknown); TAG_LENGTH=0x0004; TAG_VALUE=0x54657374 
-unknown/unassigned TAG is displayed (o.k.)
    TAG3: TAG_TYPE=0x0104 (AC-Cookie); TAG_LENGTH=0x0010;
TAG_VALUE=0x6FE2...FBB8   -the TAG is displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section
(o.k.)

Frame #4 (PADS):
!   TAG1: TAG_TYPE=0x0101 (Service-Name); TAG_LENGTH=0x0000; TAG_VALUE=<none> 
-known [RFC2516] TAG is NOT displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section (Wireshark
ERR!)
    TAG2: TAG_TYPE=0x0100 (unknown); TAG_LENGTH=0x0004; TAG_VALUE=0x54657374 
-unknown/unassigned TAG is displayed (o.k.)
    TAG3: TAG_TYPE=0x0104 (AC-Cookie); TAG_LENGTH=0x0010;
TAG_VALUE=0x6FE2...FBB8   -the TAG is displayed under "PPPoE Tags" section
(o.k.)
    PADDING: 0x00000000

One can see similar problems in presentation of PPPoE TAGs also in the packets
of the second session in the trace. Though some new (assigned) TAGs are "known"
and displayed now correctly by Wireshark (in the packets of the second
session), the general problem as it was described in the bug case is not solved
yet, at least not in Rev 25031. With Rev 25031 some new assigned TAGs can be
identified, but in relation to the bug case 2458 it is not considerably better.
As we see, there are more TAGs NOT displayed now, both known (assigned) and
unknown (unassigned).


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.