Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Transport name resolution considered harmful?

Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Transport name resolution considered harmful?

From: Christopher Maynard <Christopher.Maynard@xxxxxxxxx>

Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:22:13 +0000 (UTC)

Guy Harris <guy@...> writes:

> Perhaps we should, instead, have our own table of port numbers->protocol names.

In that case, would it make sense to add a preference to allow the user to
choose either the current services file for the mapping or to use the Wireshark
table?  

To help support proprietary/custom port mappings, it would be nice if it were
possible for the user to edit that table.

References:
- [Wireshark-dev] Transport name resolution considered harmful?
  - From: Gerald Combs
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Transport name resolution considered harmful?
  - From: Stephen Fisher
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] Transport name resolution considered harmful?
  - From: Guy Harris

Prev by Date: [Wireshark-dev] Wireshark 1.6.x requires GLib 2.10 or later, but the configure script doesn't check for that
Next by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Wireshark 1.6.x requires GLib 2.10 or later, but the configure script doesn't check for that
Previous by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Transport name resolution considered harmful?
Next by thread: [Wireshark-dev] Wireshark 1.6.x requires GLib 2.10 or later, but the configure script doesn't check for that
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread