Wireshark-bugs: [Wireshark-bugs] [Bug 8594] Adding support for IEEE-802.11ad protocol at the cur
Comment # 26
on bug 8594
from Alexis La Goutte
(In reply to comment #25)
> Created attachment 12078 [details]
> 802.11ad patch v7
>
> On Michael's patch I did the following:
> 1) Fixed a problem with the header length of the new control frames.
> 2) Fixed a problem with the DMG Beacon frame to meet the format of other
> frames.
> 3) Changed the dissection of 802.11 Extension frames to meet the convention
> of the 802.11 Management frames.
> 4) Removed the Macro IS_80211AD and replaced it with a call to
> p_add_proto_data to save the need of traversing the whole tree each time we
> need to check for DMG thus traversing once per packet.
>
Thanks for the update, i will take a look.
It is based of final 802.11ad spec (available on ieee website ?)
> (In reply to comment #24)
> > The intent is presumably to distinguish 60 GHz packets from other packets.
> Indeed.
> > There's no guarantee that an 802.11 packet will have radio metadata, and,
> > even if it does, there are several different types of radio metadata that
> > could be present.
> But as far as I could tell, checking the channel frequency is the only way
> to distinguish DMG packets. If there is no radio metadata, how else could
> this be achieved?
May be add a preference to force decode as DMG Packet
>
> > The only things the dissector appears to do differently for 60 GHz packets
> > ("directional multigigabit", or "DMG") and other packets are:
> >
> > adding expert info warnings about some types of packets that shouldn't
> > be sent by 60 GHz STAs;
> >
> > labeling the sender MAC address of a CTRL_CFP_END control frame;
> >
> > dissecting the TAG_TSPEC tag differently.
> True.
>
> > Perhaps the dissectors for radio metadata should pass to the 802.11
> > dissector some data that indicates, among other things, whether the frame is
> > a 60 GHz frame. If no such information is passed, the 802.11 dissector
> > should assume the frame isn't a 60 GHz frame.
> Honestly, I don't know how this could achieved. Any other options? If not I
> would need some help with this one.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.
