Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Decoding fields in MMS messages

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

From: "Olivier Biot (Ethereal)" <obiot.ethereal@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 22:43:16 +0100
Hi Victor,

Apologies for not answering any earlier, but I have very limited Internet access (for almost 2 months already).

The WAP MMS dissector already exiss in Ethereal. MMS-Version 0x0d means it's MMS version 1.4. I have not yet implemented MMS 1.4 into the dissector, so maybe that's the reason you're not seeing everything dissected. The MMS header fields are encoded in WSP-like format, with some limitations in order to ensure better interoperability.

I may be able to help you if you could provide me a sample capture file for debugging/updating the dissector (currently I have no access to recent WAP/MMS captures).

Best regards,

Olivier


----- Original Message ----- From: "Victor Vicente" <drzoidberg@xxxxxxxx>
To: "Ethereal development" <ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 2:17 AM
Subject: [Ethereal-dev] Decoding fields in MMS messages


Hi!

I'm writting an application which tries to decode MMS messages (protocol MMSE in Ethereal). I identify header fields (such as 'To' or 'Cc') through their corresponding associated codes. These codes are specified in the "MMS Encapsulation Protocol" document, published by OMA (Open Mobile Alliance). For example, the "X-Mms-MMS-Version" field has the 0x0d code, and its type is a short-integer value. Thus, when I read 0x0d in the message (in the appropriate location), I know that the next byte contains the version value. When I try to decode the 'Date' field of some MMS message (with code 0x05), Ethereal identifies it as a 6-byte value. I think that only five bytes should be used (one for the field code and four bytes more for its value). If I select the 'Date' field of a MMS message, six bytes are marked (the codes 0x05 (in fact, Ethereal displays this code as 0x89, but the most significant bit should not be took into account) and 0x04 and four bytes for the value).

Should I decode this field using the two-byte code 0x05 0x04, or is there something incorrect?

Thanks in advance,

Víctor V.

_______________________________________________
Ethereal-dev mailing list
Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev