Hi,
No wories. I still think it's good to have sanity checks (You do _not_
want to get involved in corrupt capture files), but they should not hinder
developement. So what I've done is open up the channel space from 128 up,
which covers the cases seen so far and hopefully future stuff.
Thanx,
Jaap
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Rolf Fiedler wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I am the author of the eyesdn wiretap module. Recently we added ATM
> > > support to our trace format. We used channel id 129 for that, so far
> > > only 0 for D channel and 1-30 for bearer channels had been in use.
> > >
>
> I've taken the liberty to keep the sanity check in place and added 129
> as as valid channel ID.
>
> --
> Sorry Jaap,
> but this is no good. So far Wireshark complained about channel 129, now
> it gets a little further and then complains about channel 128. I
> checked, channel 128 is used for ATM cells and channel 129 for layer 1
> indications like "G.708 synced" which are shown as frames.
> Either we implement the complete list of channels that we currently use
> (0-D channel, 1-30 B channel, 128 ATM cells, 129 ATM layer indications)
> and intend to use in the future and keep on updating that or we simply
> remove the test. Sorry for giving you not all the information, but
> a trace file format is a moving target in some respects. Either we get
> rid of the test or we keep on patching the same spot.
>
> Sorry for causing more work, but I did not have this information
> initially. What do you prefer, maintaining the list of channels in
> source or removing the test? I would vote for the later (and wish I had
> never included the channel test in the source).
>
> Best regards,
> Rolf
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-dev mailing list
> Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
>
>
