Re: Introducing an FT_OUI type, should it be an integer or bytes?

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

On Aug 19, 2017, at 5:23 PM, Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu> wrote:

>       1) Filter expressions that compare an OUI field against a 24-bit integral value might become invalid - but you 
> might be able to make that work by allowing FT_OUI be represented, in filters, either as an integral value or as 3 
> octets (allowing 0C0102, 0C:01:02, etc.).

Speaking of which:

        https://ask.wireshark.org/questions/62485/isakmpispi-as-a-display-filter

should we allow a byte string value in a filter expression to be represented with colons, dashes, dots, or nothing as a 
separator between the byte values?  (Space would be trickier, as it's also a token separator; that way may lie FORTRAN 
IV and FORTRAN 77, the latter of which, as I remember, required a fairly carefully constructed lexical analyzer in the 
original Bell Labs f77 compiler, feeding a YACC parser.)
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe