Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] asn2wrs blurb
From: "Kukosa, Tomas" <tomas.kukosa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:07:23 +0200
Hello Graeme, as we have not got any other opinion you are the winner :) and I will change it in that way. Tomas -----Original Message----- From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kukosa, Tomas Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 6:48 AM To: wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] asn2wrs blurb Hello Graeme, the 1st idea was to put full filed name (e.g. "Certificate/signedCertificate/subject") if the field has only one occurence. I have not thought about it later and it remains still the same. It is the question what should be in the blurb. We can find either one value suitable for all protocols or I can implement command line option if we find more than one purposeful value. You choice is "proto.WrsType". What are other opinions? -----Original Message----- From: ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Graeme Lunt Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 4:13 PM To: 'Ethereal development' Subject: [Ethereal-dev] asn2wrs blurb Tomas, I want to extend asn2wrs to generate ASN.1 type information for a given hf that I can use to bring up ASN.1 spec at the appropriate location. Whilst I have done this with a separate "#include packet-XXX-typearr.c", I was wondering if the asn2wrs generated "blurb" could be used? I can't quite tell what the asn2wrs wants to set the "blurb" to - but it is often blank in asn2wrs generated files. Attached is a patch (for discussion only) for what I am looking, so you can see what I mean. With this patch, packet-x509.c goes from: ... { &hf_x509af_version, { "version", "x509af.version", FT_INT32, BASE_DEC, VALS(x509af_Version_vals), 0, "", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_serialNumber, { "serialNumber", "x509af.serialNumber", FT_INT32, BASE_DEC, NULL, 0, "", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_signature, { "signature", "x509af.signature", FT_NONE, BASE_NONE, NULL, 0, "", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_issuer, { "issuer", "x509af.issuer", FT_UINT32, BASE_DEC, VALS(x509if_Name_vals), 0, "", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_validity, { "validity", "x509af.validity", FT_NONE, BASE_NONE, NULL, 0, "Certificate/signedCertificate/validity", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_subject, { "subject", "x509af.subject", FT_UINT32, BASE_DEC, VALS(x509af_SubjectName_vals), 0, "Certificate/signedCertificate/subject", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_subjectPublicKeyInfo, { "subjectPublicKeyInfo", "x509af.subjectPublicKeyInfo", FT_NONE, BASE_NONE, NULL, 0, "Certificate/signedCertificate/subjectPublicKeyInfo", HFILL }}, to: { &hf_x509af_version, { "version", "x509af.version", FT_INT32, BASE_DEC, VALS(x509af_Version_vals), 0, "x509af.Version", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_serialNumber, { "serialNumber", "x509af.serialNumber", FT_INT32, BASE_DEC, NULL, 0, "x509af.CertificateSerialNumber", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_signature, { "signature", "x509af.signature", FT_NONE, BASE_NONE, NULL, 0, "x509af.AlgorithmIdentifier", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_issuer, { "issuer", "x509af.issuer", FT_UINT32, BASE_DEC, VALS(x509if_Name_vals), 0, "x509if.Name", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_validity, { "validity", "x509af.validity", FT_NONE, BASE_NONE, NULL, 0, "x509af.Validity", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_subject, { "subject", "x509af.subject", FT_UINT32, BASE_DEC, VALS(x509af_SubjectName_vals), 0, "x509af.SubjectName", HFILL }}, { &hf_x509af_subjectPublicKeyInfo, { "subjectPublicKeyInfo", "x509af.subjectPublicKeyInfo", FT_NONE, BASE_NONE, NULL, 0, "x509af.SubjectPublicKeyInfo", HFILL }}, Comments? Graeme _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
- References:
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] asn2wrs blurb
- From: Kukosa, Tomas
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] asn2wrs blurb
- Prev by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] how to access lower level packet information
- Next by Date: [Wireshark-dev] call_dissector() is eating memory
- Previous by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] asn2wrs blurb
- Next by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] IPsec Dissector to decrypt ESP Payload
- Index(es):