Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Possible New Option for Tshark?
From: Craig Votava <craig.votava@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:45:33 -0500
Folks-

Many thanks for the replies, here are my responses:

From: Stephen Fisher <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 03:29:36PM -0500, Craig Votava wrote:

I wrote a Perl script that feeds pcap data to an instance of tshark
running in a child process, then takes the decoded output to present
to the user.

The problem is that I don't know when tshark is done sending output
back to me.

How about using "pdml" or "psml" with the -T option.

Stephen: Thanks for the suggestion! I actually played around with these a bit, and although it would work, I decided not to use it for performance reasons.

My tool is a real-time GUI for analyzing trace output. When the user clicks on a message, I want a selected portion of the ASCII tshark output (the meat of the message without the IP headers) slapped up in a window quickly. When I used pdml, it increased the lag time in getting the data up for the user. I'm guessing because it's more CPU intensive to have tshark format the data and then for my program to unformat it. The difference wasn't much, but it was noticeable, and annoying.

...especially given that the default ("-T text") output of TShark is designed for humans, not programs, to read. If your program can read it, great, but if it's easier for it to read PSML or PDML....

Since the end result is to be displayed for humans, I'm hoping I can avoid the additional pdml->ascii iteration. It seems to me that a new tshark option to help me avoid this is a reasonable compromise. What are your thoughts?

From: Mark Landriscina <mlandri1@xxxxxxx>

Using -T with pdml/psml would probably be the best approach if you want text output. However, if that doesn't work for you, then you could consider doing what some programs like SCAPY do. Save your packets in a temp pcap file and pass the file name to your tshark child process when you are spawning it.

Mark: Another good suggestion as well. This was how my first version was written, however the delay time for quickly slapping the output into the window for the user was too much. By holding a single tshark co-process up and running all the time, I get a very fast turnaround from supplying input and getting output. This really works well, except for knowing when to stop reading.

Since my first post, I've discovered a bunch of techniques for doing non-blocking reads on Windows. All of them seem more complicated to me, than just having tshark add an end-of-decoding indication to the ASCII output. Thoughts?

Thanks

-Craig