https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3301
--- Comment #9 from Neil Piercy <Neil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-12-01 14:46:28 PST ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > How about a change which makes blank match everything
> > instead? Blank matching nothing is useless and thus confusing? If you agree 'll
> > send the trivial patch.
>
> Hi Neil. I'm not really familiar with this bug or sccp, but if it's indeed a
> trivial patch and useful, maybe you could just post it anyway and one of the
> core developers who know a little more about sccp can then take a look at it?
Actually, I've realised there are two problems here:
a) the packet-sccp.c has a bug in the declared valid ranges of the SSN and DPC
values in the user table used to match to a subdissector. The SSN range is 16
bits rather than 8 (not really an issue) but the DPC range is 16 bits rather
than 24 - so many traces cannot be matched by this table - I'll attach a patch
to address this.
b) the range handling in range.c treats an empty field as matching no value,
which is not useful in this context - it would be better to match any value.
I'll add a patch for that, but I'm not sure whether any other uses of range
handling assume/require the current behaviour.
Neil
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
