Re: packet-ieee80211.c

[Alexis La Goutte <alexis.lagoutte () gmail com>]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:30 AM, <mmann78 () netscape net> wrote:

> (sorry about the previous email; trigger happy enter key)
>
> While trying to remove decode_numeric_bitfield() calls, I came across some
> curious code in packet-ieee80211.c.
> "hf_ieee80211_block_ack_control_multi_tid_info" and
> "hf_ieee80211_block_ack_control_compressed_tid_info" both use
> decode_numeric_bitfield() with a 16-bit mask, yet the
> proto_tree_add_uint_format() they're wrapped up in only specifies a length
> of 1 (byte).  Within the hf_ array they are also listed as a FT_UINT16 type.
> Also there are a few other hf_ variables within the Multi-TID BlockAckReq
> and Multi-TID BlockAck handling that have proto_tree_add_* only specifying
> a length of 1, but the type is FT_UINT16 with a 16-bit mask.  Should these
> even work?

Hi Michael,
Yes, it is very strange ! (this code need so rework)
This information about this fields have available here
http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.11n-2009.pdf Chapiter
7.2.1.8 BlockAck frame format

 Regards,


> ___________________________________________________________________________
> 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
___________________________________________________________________________
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