Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] dissector_add: Multiple registrations to same TCP/UDP ports;

[Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

That was how UNISTIM (a plugin) won. <grin>
I ended up making its port configurable so it was the user who would make the 
final selection.

Thanx,
Jaap

Bill Meier wrote:
> Jeff Morriss wrote:
> > > Q1: Can anyone suggest the appropriate resolution of these conflicts ?
> > Does that (the registration loss + memory leak) still happen if the 
> > dissectors are "new style"?  I would think that converting them to "new 
> > style" dissectors "should" be the answer but I didn't look into it.
>
> Having dug a bit further into the three protocols I'm inclined to just 
> do a dissector_add_handle in the airopeek & cpfi dissectors leaving only 
> the tapa dissector registered on port 5000.
>
> 1. Currently it appears that the airopeek dissector can already only be 
> accessed via decode-as.
>
> 2. It also appears that the cpfi dissector can currently only be 
> accessed via decode-as (or by changing cpfi port preference).
>
>
> In any case:
>
> Two of the dissectors (cpfi and tapa) are already new-style.
>
> The issue, unfortunately, is that currently all 3 dissectors explicitly 
> register themselves to udp port 5000 via dissector_add().
>
> Since there's no checking in dissector_add for duplicate registrations 
> the net result is that the last dissector to register on udp port 5000 
> wins with the previous registrations being obliterated.