Wireshark-bugs: [Wireshark-bugs] [Bug 9057] Camel IDP filtering problem
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:28:47 +0000

Comment # 1 on bug 9057 from 
Well the rationale for the decoding is that all (most?) Camel "numbers are
defined as something like:
CallingPartyNumber {PARAMETERS-BOUND : bound} ::= OCTET STRING (SIZE(
    bound.&minCallingPartyNumberLength .. bound.&maxCallingPartyNumberLength))
-- Indicates the Calling Party Number. Refer to ETSI EN 300 356 1 [23] for
encoding.

>From a programing point of view it then becomes efficent to call the same
dissection routine for all numbers with the same encoding like in this case
dissect_isup_calling_party_number_parameter().

Would a filter like (camel.callingPartyNumber) &&
(isup.calling_party_nature_of_address_indicator == 4) serve the same purpose?

I'm not convinsed that it's worth the effort to have different filters for all
the different numbers.

You are receiving this mail because:
  • You are watching all bug changes.