Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev 41952: /trunk/epan/dissectors/ /trun
Joerg Mayer skrev 2012-06-05 21:52:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 08:38:26AM +0000, etxrab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=41952
User: etxrab
Date: 2012/04/05 01:38 AM
Log:
Use common code to add ip version to the tree.
Directory: /trunk/epan/dissectors/
Changes Path Action
+8 -4 packet-ip.c Modified
+2 -0 packet-ip.h Modified
+1 -18 packet-ipv6.c Modified
I strongly disagree with this patch and the patch doing the same to dscp
(and the corresponding bug):
It completely violates the principle of least surprise: Previous to this
patch *all* filterable elements of the ipv6 protocol had filters starting
with ipv6. - this is no longer the case. The reason we have the ip_version
in ipv6 *in addition to* ipv6_version was exactly this: Some people might
be surprised if ip.version==6 would not work - principle of least surprise
again.
I'm very much for reverting r41952 and r41953 - so much so that I will do
exactly this if there are no strong arguments to not do this.
Ciao
Jörg
If I remember correctly the user complaining about this was surprised
that clicking on ip.version in an IPv4
packet and doing prepare as a filter and changing the value to 6 got no
IPv6 packets match in a mixed Ipv4 Ipv6
trace. I fail to see the importance of every field name without
exception adhering to the rule of being prefixed
with "protoname". To me this is a legitimate exception.
Regards
Anders
