Wireshark · Wireshark-users: Re: [Wireshark-users] VRRP3 parsing info

[Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Looking at the code and the draft it showed a mixup in changed fields.
I've checked in a fix for this, see revision 19188.
Hopefully if the buildbot works a Win32 package should be there.

Thanx,
Jaap

On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Sada Mita wrote:

> Hello
>
>   I'm using the latest release 0.99.3.
>   VRRPver3 is still in ietf draft-ietf-vrrp-ipv6-spec-07 to my understanding.
>   When I captured it, wireshark parse VRRP Field incorrectly.
>   There is no "AuthType" in the draft specification.  But wireshark is showing that.
>
>   ## VRRP Field ###
>   Version
>   Type
>   VRID
>   priority
>   Auth Type   <<<<<<<
>   Adver Int
>   Checksum
>   Ipv6 address
>
> * also Cout IPv6 Addr is missing after "Priority".
>
>
>   Can it be fixed?
>
>   Thanks
>   Sam
>
> wireshark-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 02:09:47 +0100 (BST)
> From: Sada Mita
> Subject: [Wireshark-users] IP Data checksum
> To: wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Message-ID: <20060822010947.61413.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm seeing that VRRPv6 checksum is incorrect.
> Is this because of sniffer tool(ethreal 0.10.11 for linux)? Or problem at VRRPv6 of sender ?
>
> I just couldn't find any info how the checksum calculation for non-TCP packets is handled by ethereal. I mean I know that ethereal can set enable/disable for TCP checksum calcuation.
>
> Any information would be appreciated!!
>
> Sam
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users/attachments/20060822/affccd70/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:04:15 -0700
> From: Guy Harris
> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] IP Data checksum
> To: Community support list for Wireshark
>
> Message-ID:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
>
> On Aug 21, 2006, at 6:09 PM, Sada Mita wrote:
>
> > I'm seeing that VRRPv6 checksum is incorrect.
> > Is this because of sniffer tool(ethreal 0.10.11 for linux)? Or
> > problem at VRRPv6 of sender ?
> >
> > I just couldn't find any info how the checksum calculation for non-
> > TCP packets is handled by ethereal. I mean I know that ethereal
> > can set enable/disable for TCP checksum calcuation.
>
> Try the current version of Wireshark; there might have been a bug in
> earlier versions. If there's still a bug in the current version, ask
> again.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:34:34 +0200
> From: Joerg Mayer
> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] IP Data checksum
> To: Community support list for Wireshark
>
> Message-ID: <20060822103434.GB5709@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 07:04:15PM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> > Try the current version of Wireshark; there might have been a bug in
> > earlier versions. If there's still a bug in the current version, ask
> > again.
>
> A bug was recently fixed in wireshark svn. So either get a snapshot
> build or wait for wireshark 0.99.3 which should be out this week.
>
> ciao
> Joerg
> --
> Joerg Mayer
> We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
> works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-users mailing list
> Wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-users
>
>
> End of Wireshark-users Digest, Vol 3, Issue 23
> **********************************************
>
>