Olivier.Biot at siemens
Feb 27, 2003, 1:10 PM
ethereal -G (Protocol and field names)
While automating the generation of protocol field documentation (after
per-protocol sorting of protocol field names), I came across the conclusion
that most of the protocol fields for a given protocol also share the
protocol name as first part of the field name (e.g., aarp (Appletalk Address
Resolution Protocol) has a field named aarp.dst.hw). However not all
protocols do share this logic.
If I understand it correctly, we often refer to a protocol by 2 names: the
official protocol name (e.g., as listed in IANA assigned port numbers) and
an internal name.
Sometimes one protocol is defined but the IANA repository (or another body)
refers to a set of related protocols. Example: the WTP protocol is used in
connection-oriented WSP. We are able to decode it when using nonsecure WSP
(no WTLS), this means IANA port 9201, with registered IANA protocol "name":
The same is true for the WSP protocol, which exists in 2 flavors (WTLS
security not considered here): connectionless (wap-wsp, port 9200) and
connection-oriented (wap-wsp-wtp, port 9201). See the confusion?
Which logic should we apply to protocol names and their associated protocol
field names (especially in situations where protocols implicitly refer to