On Apr 12, 2019, at 10:15 AM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Agree. Sorry about that. No disrespect was intended, but I'm still not > sure I understand the need for UDP encapsulation *as part of the > protocol*. I guess saying "GSMTAP can optionally be encapsulated in UDP > with the well-known port xyz" would be something else, and it'd make > more sense to me than saying it has to be. I see nothing about a struct gsmtap_hdr: http://osmocom.org/projects/baseband/wiki/GSMTAP that 1) requires that it plus the payload be encapsulated in a UDP datagram or 2) would prevent it from being at the beginning of a LINKTYPE_GSMTAP/DLT_GSMTAP packet in a pcap or pcapng file.
