Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Help on packet correlation
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 15:59:38 -0700
On May 28, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Craig Jackson <cejackson51@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> However, it looks like the example suggests the answer, without explicitly stating it: If the VISITED flag is not set, then this is the first trip through the dissector for this packet, and therefore the packets are being processed in order. This would allow it to remember a pending request name in the conversation structure, and use it when the response is handled. It would be useful to have this documented somewhere: "If the VISITED flag is not true, then the packets are being processed in the order they were received."

That should probably be explicitly stated.  Please either submit a bug against the documentation or a Gerrit change.

> The other interesting point is that both iscsi and rpc choose to use trees instead of hashes to store their data. It would be interesting to have the tradeoffs documented, especially with regards to memory overhead.

Yes.  Please submit a separate bug about that.