problems with dissecting

[Alexander Chemeris]

How could dissector display decoded message correctly if it is decoded
incorrectly?

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Ivan Kluchnikov
<Ivan.Kluchnikov at fairwaves.ru> wrote:
> Yes, this issue exists in the Wireshark too, but it is not critical
> there, because dissector displays decoding of this message correct.
> In any case, I will prepare a patch.
>
> 2013/3/1 Alexander Chemeris <alexander.chemeris at gmail.com>:
>> Ivan,
>>
>> Could you please check whether this issue exists in the Wireshark dissector
>> as well? If yes, then we should submit a patch upstream.
>>
>> Please excuse typos. Written with a touchscreen keyboard.
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Alexander Chemeris
>> CEO/Founder Fairwaves LLC
>> http://fairwaves.ru
>>
>> On Mar 1, 2013 1:16 AM, "Ivan Kluchnikov" <Ivan.Kluchnikov at fairwaves.ru>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> hi, andreas and steve!
>>>
>>> I fixed this problem, now decoding should work, you can check the last
>>> commit of master branch.
>>> There were problems with decoding and encoding of CSN_RECURSIVE_TARRAY,
>>> CSN_RECURSIVE_TARRAY_1, CSN_RECURSIVE_TARRAY_2.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/2/19 jolly <andreas at eversberg.eu>:
>>> > hi,
>>> >
>>> > steve and me experienced a problem with dissecting a "packet resource
>>> > request" at pcu. the patch i attached will show the following output:
>>> >
>>> > $ make && src/osmo-pcu
>>> >
>>> > PayloadType = 1 | spare = 0 | R = 0 | MESSAGE_TYPE = 5 |
>>> > Exist_ACCESS_TYPE =
>>> > 1 | ACCESS_TYPE = 3 |  : ID | Choice PacketResourceRequestID = 1 |
>>> > u.TLLI =
>>> > 0x7ee0e8fd | : End ID | Exist_MS_Radio_Access_capability = 1 |  :
>>> > MS_Radio_Access_capability | MS_RA_capability_value { | Choice
>>> > MS_RA_capability_value_Choice = 1 | u.Content length = 34 |
>>> > RF_Power_Capability = 4 | Exist_A5_bits = 1 | A5_bits = 96 | ES_IND = 1
>>> > | PS
>>> > = 0 | VGCS = 0 | VBS = 0 | Exist_Multislot_capability = 1 |  :
>>> > Multislot_capability | Exist_HSCSD_multislot_class = 0 |
>>> > Exist_GPRS_multislot_class = 1 | GPRS_multislot_class = 10 ....
>>> >
>>> > this is all correct, but then i patched the get_ms_class_by_capability()
>>> > function at grps_rlcmac_data.c:
>>> >
>>> > ...
>>> > printf("we have = %d\n", cap->Count_MS_RA_capability_value);
>>> >         for (i = 0; i < cap->Count_MS_RA_capability_value; i++) {
>>> > printf("index=%d\n", cap->MS_RA_capability_value[i].IndexOfAccTech);
>>> > printf("exists multislot capability %d\n",
>>> > cap->MS_RA_capability_value[i].u.Content.Exist_Multislot_capability);
>>> > printf("exists class %d\n",
>>> >
>>> > cap->MS_RA_capability_value[i].u.Content.Multislot_capability.Exist_GPRS_multislot_class);
>>> > printf("class %d\n",
>>> >
>>> > cap->MS_RA_capability_value[i].u.Content.Multislot_capability.GPRS_multislot_class);
>>> > ...
>>> >
>>> > the output continues as this:
>>> >
>>> > we have = 2
>>> > index=2
>>> > exists multislot capability 0
>>> > exists class 1
>>> > class 10
>>> > index=0
>>> > exists multislot capability 0
>>> > exists class 0
>>> > class 0
>>> >
>>> > the "class 10" is correct, also it is correct that the class only exists
>>> > in
>>> > the first entry of the capability array. the output of the dissector
>>> > states
>>> > that multislot capability exists (Exist_Multislot_capability = 1), but
>>> > if i
>>> > look at the structure, this field is not set.
>>> >
>>> > i looked at the dissector code, but don't really understand why
>>> > CSN_NEXT_EXIST works for some elements and not for others.
>>> >
>>> > any ideas?
>>> >
>>> > regards,
>>> >
>>> > andreas
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Ivan Kluchnikov.
>>> http://fairwaves.ru
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ivan Kluchnikov.
> http://fairwaves.ru



--
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.
CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио
http://fairwaves.ru