Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Should payload dissectors' (RTP) packets depend on call-setup dissectors' (SIP)

[Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws@xxxxxxxxx>]

Are you saying that the correct frame is currently not tagged or that it 
may not always be or...?

I suppose I should find a sample capture and try it out.

Anyway: good idea, bad idea?

Jaap Keuter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yes, that setup frame should be sufficient. The problem now is that not the correct setup frame is tagged, but that is another matter. 
> Point is case is the SIP/SDP packet defining the conversation, to which the RTP dissector is set. 
>
> Thanks,
> Jaap
>
> Send from my iPhone
>
> On 1 jun. 2012, at 20:44, Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > One of the more frequently asked questions/reported bugs is users filtering for RTP, saving^W exporting those displayed packets, then opening the new capture file only to find plain UDP.  This is because the call-setup protocol (e.g., SIP) wasn't included in the display filter.
> >
> > Now we have the ability to mark frames as dependent on others.  Should, for example, RTP frames mark the call-setup frames as dependencies?  (I noticed that RTP has a Setup Frame field; would one frame really be enough?)
> > ___________________________________________________________________________
> > Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
> >            mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe