Re: Capturing CAN packets

[Joakim Wiberg <jow () hms se>]

Seems like the DTLs are exactly what I was looking for, didn't know about that until now.

The information that I will sending could me made identical to SocketCAN. Would it be ok to reuse the same DTL as 
SocketCAN? Doing this I would only need to write a dissector for the higher layer protocol and hook it to SocketCAN in 
a similar way as CANopen.

Thanks,
Joakim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org] On Behalf Of Felix 
> Obenhuber
> Sent: den 26 april 2012 17:22
> To: Developer support list for Wireshark
> Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Capturing CAN packets
>
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Joakim Wiberg <jow () hms se> wrote:
> > Any suggestions on how we shall encapsulate the CAN frames in Ethernet frames to make them show up in Wireshark in a 
> > logical way.
> >
> > The current implementation that's using a OUI in the SNAP header works, but is this the preferable way? Is it better 
> > to use an unused Ethernet type, or something else?
>
> Can you describe why you choose the way over the NIC and not over pcap? When you connect your CAN capture code to pcap 
> you can use some DLT as it is done for USB or SocketCAN etc.
> I know it's a mess, that all CAN device manufacturer provide it's own API for Windows due to the lack of something 
> like SocketCAN.
> Felix
___________________________________________________________________________
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