Re: [Wireshark-dev] Dissecting a Protocol with multiple static TCP ports

From: Bill Meier <wmeier_at_nospam>
Date: Tue Apr 27 2010 - 01:10:14 GMT
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>

Craig Bumpstead wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Thanks for the quick response. That setting is off.
> The first and second packets are TCP port 4435 and 21016 which it decodes.
> However from that point on it doesn't decode packets with
> TCP port 4435.
>
> I loath posting my code, but obviously I am making a mistake somewhere.
>

I don't see anything obviously wrong with the code.

A question: What is actually shown in Wireshark for the packets not
decoded ?

Are they decoded as TCP ? As some other protocol ?

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: lie zheng: "Re: [Wireshark-dev] Help Me To Solve The Problem"
Previous message: Craig Bumpstead: "Re: [Wireshark-dev] Dissecting a Protocol with multiple static TCP ports"
In reply to: Craig Bumpstead: "Re: [Wireshark-dev] Dissecting a Protocol with multiple static TCP ports"
Next in thread: Craig Bumpstead: "Re: [Wireshark-dev] Dissecting a Protocol with multiple static TCP ports"
Reply: Craig Bumpstead: "Re: [Wireshark-dev] Dissecting a Protocol with multiple static TCP ports"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]