put raw payload of IEs after header
Closed this issue · 9 comments
Some IEs aren't completely parsed by the dissector. I understand this is a bit of work and needs some time to be done, no problem. In the meantime, however, would it be possible to display the payload of those IEs after the IE header in the parsed output?
I am about to start with that, the nested IEs. However, as is now, are all the IE classified (Header, Payload IEs)?
AFAICT, yes (at least the ones used in draft-minimal). One thing is that the "TSCH timeslot IE", etc appears at the same level as the MLME IE, but should be nested within that, no?
yes, you're right. I will check it out to see how I can get it done.
2015-07-02 9:16 GMT+02:00 Thomas Watteyne notifications@github.com:
AFAICT, yes (at least the ones used in draft-minimal). One thing is that
the "TSCH timeslot IE", etc appears at the same level as the MLME IE, but
should be nested within that, no?—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment)
.
Jonathan Muñoz
please check the latest commit.
will do, thanks.
In the current version, the payload appears after each IE, Jonathan is
working to make it appear inside each IE. This should be updated soon :)
Guillaume
2015-07-05 19:53 GMT+02:00 Thomas Watteyne notifications@github.com:
will do, thanks.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment)
.
OK, thanks. To publish the draft with the results, I will have to freeze the implementation tonight and dot the capturing. Please stop me if you plan on fixing this still tonight.
Thomas,
We plan to fix it tomorrow. So if you feel the latest commit is not
suitable, please use the previous one (7c4db7f
7c4db7f).
I think both are valid but not completely satisfactory.
Guillaume
2015-07-05 20:27 GMT+02:00 Thomas Watteyne notifications@github.com:
OK, thanks. To publish the draft with the results, I will have to freeze
the implementation tonight and dot the capturing. Please stop me if you
plan on fixing this still tonight.—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment)
.
OK, thanks