Wireshark · Wireshark-users: Re: [Wireshark-users] [Winpcap-users] Http addressing with Ethereal

[<ceo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks,
Sorry for misleading, but I forgot to say that I refer to the third pain in 
witch the address is the phisical address or the length in bytes ( in hexa) 
from the start of the packet.

Thanks

I. lesher

> This is a Wireshark (the new name for Ethereal, as of a little over a 
> year ago) issue, not a WinPcap issue; I'm redirecting it to the 
> wireshark-users mailing list, which is the list where questions about 
> Wireshark should be asked.  Further discussion should take place on  that 
> list.  See
>
> http://www.wireshark.org/lists/
>
> for information on Wireshark mailing lists.
>
> What do you mean by "follow the addressing of the whole packet" and 
> "specific to the HTTP data"?
>
> The first column is probably the frame number, and the second column  is 
> usually the packet time stamp.  Do you mean the third column?  If  so, 
> that's usually the source IP address, which would be the IP  address that 
> sent the packet; IP has no idea whether it's sending HTTP  or not.  An IP 
> datagram has an IP address; there is no notion that  part of one IP 
> datagram has one IP address and another part has  another address, so the 
> only addressing is "the addressing of the  whole packet" - there's no 
> addressing specific to the HTTP data.