Wireshark-users: Re: [Wireshark-users] message fragment in message overview forBICCpackets
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 12:11:35PM +0000, Peter Cambouris wrote:
> Take me off the list pls
Please read the footer that is appended to each and every mail on
how to do that yourself.
Thanks
Joerg
>
>
>
> Sent From Peter Cambouris's Blackberry
> Libra Information Technologies
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Anders Broman" <anders.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:55:24
> To:"Community support list for Wireshark" <wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] message fragment in message overview for
> BICCpackets
>
>
> Hi,
> Most probably a bug...
> Regards
> Anders
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:wireshark-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ariel
> Burbaickij
> Sent: den 17 januari 2008 11:59
> To: Community support list for Wireshark
> Subject: [Wireshark-users] message fragment in message overview for
> BICCpackets
>
> Hello all,
> for IAM and APM I see following in message overview one-line
> representation:
> (Message fragment), with session description, However, based on the
> content of the message it should be complete and is actually complete.
> So, question is what is meant with message fragment here? Actually,
> sample trace for BICC provided in repository shows the same behaviour
> for IAM
>
> /wbr
> Ariel Burbaickij
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-users mailing list
> Wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-users
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-users mailing list
> Wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-users
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-users mailing list
> Wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-users
--
Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
