Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems
From: Cristian Constantin <cristian.constantin@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:51:26 +0100
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 09:33:26PM +0100, Anders Broman wrote: > Hi, > I have checked in a fix in revision 2731, formally I think the frame is > wrongly Encoded as the tag [3] is missing but from comments in the code > It looks like this is common, also from the comments in the asn1 > Description IMSI should be there as well, right? cristian: than why is it marked as OPTIONAL?? (see below) from the asn1 point of view, a SendRoutingInfoRes SEQUENCE w/o imsi is correct. > > Best regards > Anders > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] För Cristian Constantin > Skickat: den 27 januari 2009 18:28 > Till: wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Ämne: [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems > > hi! > > I have seen some problems in wireshark when decoding the response of an > SendRoutingInfo (locationInfoRetrievalContext-v3). the asn1 def of this > is: > > SendRoutingInfoRes ::= [3] SEQUENCE { > imsi [9] IMSI OPTIONAL, cristian: ^^^^^^^^^^ > -- IMSI must be present if SendRoutingInfoRes is not segmented. > -- If the TC-Result-NL segmentation option is taken the IMSI must be > -- present in one segmented transmission of SendRoutingInfoRes. bye now! cristian > extendedRoutingInfo ExtendedRoutingInfo OPTIONAL, > cug-CheckInfo [3] CUG-CheckInfo OPTIONAL, > cugSubscriptionFlag [6] NULL OPTIONAL, > subscriberInfo [7] SubscriberInfo OPTIONAL, > ss-List [1] SS-List OPTIONAL, > basicService [5] Ext-BasicServiceCode OPTIONAL, > forwardingInterrogationRequired [4] NULL OPTIONAL, > vmsc-Address [2] ISDN-AddressString OPTIONAL, > extensionContainer [0] ExtensionContainer OPTIONAL, > ... , > naea-PreferredCI [10] NAEA-PreferredCI OPTIONAL, > -- naea-PreferredCI is included at the discretion of the HLR operator. > ccbs-Indicators [11] CCBS-Indicators OPTIONAL, > msisdn [12] ISDN-AddressString OPTIONAL, > numberPortabilityStatus [13] NumberPortabilityStatus OPTIONAL, > istAlertTimer [14] IST-AlertTimerValue OPTIONAL, > supportedCamelPhasesInVMSC [15] SupportedCamelPhases OPTIONAL, > offeredCamel4CSIsInVMSC [16] OfferedCamel4CSIs OPTIONAL, > routingInfo2 [17] RoutingInfo OPTIONAL, > ss-List2 [18] SS-List OPTIONAL, > basicService2 [19] Ext-BasicServiceCode OPTIONAL, > allowedServices [20] AllowedServices OPTIONAL, > unavailabilityCause [21] UnavailabilityCause OPTIONAL, > releaseResourcesSupported [22] NULL OPTIONAL, > gsm-BearerCapability [23] ExternalSignalInfo OPTIONAL > } > > interestingly enough, extendedRoutingInfo is NOT tagged within the > SEQUENCE. > > now, wireshark(1.0.5)/debian linux decodes the SendRoutingInfoRes/ > extendedRoutingInfo/routingInfo/roamingNumber as: > > 00.. .... = Class: UNIVERSAL (0) > ..1. .... = P/C: Constructed Encoding > ...1 0000 = Tag: SEQUENCE (16) > Length: 9 > 00.. .... = Class: UNIVERSAL (0) > ..0. .... = P/C: Primitive Encoding > ...0 0100 = Tag: OCTET STRING (4) > Length: 7 > imsi: A8241021324344 > TBCD digits: 8:420112233444 > > (which is obviously wrong since the imsi within the sequence has the tag > 0, but not an UNIVERSAL one, right?) > > whereas ethereal (0.10.12) / windows recognizes it properly (!!): > > 00.. .... = Class: Universal (0) > ..1. .... = P/C: Constructed Encoding > ...1 0000 = Tag: SEQUENCE, SEQUENCE OF (16) > Length: 14 > returnResult_result: 02011630090407A8241021324344 > 00.. .... = Class: Universal (0) > ..0. .... = P/C: Primitive Encoding > ...0 0010 = Tag: INTEGER (2) > Length: 1 > invokeCmd: sendRoutingInfo (22) > extendedRoutingInfo: routingInfo (0) > routingInfo: roamingNumber (0) > 00.. .... = Class: Universal (0) > ..0. .... = P/C: Primitive Encoding > ...0 0100 = Tag: OCTET STRING (4) > Length: 7 > roamingNumber: A8241021324344 > 1... .... = Extension: No Extension > .010 .... = Nature of number: National Significant > Number (0 > x02) > .... 1000 = Number plan: National Numbering (0x08) > ISDN Address digits: 4201122334 > > what is wrong with the new version of wireshark? > > bye now! > cristian > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems
- From: Anders Broman
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems
- References:
- [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems
- From: Cristian Constantin
- Re: [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems
- From: Anders Broman
- [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems
- Prev by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] SOLVED: Re: Issue with 1.1.2 and latest SVN (27315) - on Win32 - Wireshark is not displayed
- Next by Date: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [PATCH 0/2] Implement packet loss detection in MPEG2 Transport Streams
- Previous by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems
- Next by thread: Re: [Wireshark-dev] map decoding problems
- Index(es):