Any reason why displaying MAC addresses has not been implemented yet?
Using v5.6.5,build1600, in cli:
FW60EXXXXXXXXXXX # diagnose sniffer packet wifi 'ether[0:2] == 0xffff' 6 100 interfaces=[wifi] filters=[ether[0:2] == 0xffff] pcap_lookupnet: wifi: no IPv4 address assigned 1.610771 wifi -- arp who-has 192.168.1.254 tell 192.168.1.108 0x0000 ffff ffff ffff 4c11 bff4 04e0 0806 0001 ......L......... ............
you could also save your capture into a textile (putty could e.g. do that) and convert it to pcap with some script you could find on the net and then open it in Wireshark to see mac addresses.
--
"It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes." - Douglas Adams
Not a direct answer but maybe useful: to be able to filter on MACs you need to specify the 'ether' keyword. As already posted, where a part of the string is compared.
for a broadcast the MAC address in the diagnose sniffer packet with 6 works for both source and destination
but for other MAC address the destination is often 00:00:00:00:00:00 or 00:00:00:00:00:01 which makes little sense, why won't the actual MAC on the wire be shown? this can be useful to detect certain odd network situations.
2019-05-09 03:25:17.926691 wan1 in arp reply 23.1.4.88 is-at 60:4f:cd:c8:5a:80 0x0000 0000 0000 0001 608f cde8 5a80 0806 0001 ......p...Z.....
[EDIT] ah i now notice this only happens with diagnose sniffer any with sniffer on an interface i do see the actual MAC address.
Select Forum Responses to become Knowledge Articles!
Select the “Nominate to Knowledge Base” button to recommend a forum post to become a knowledge article.
User | Count |
---|---|
1742 | |
1114 | |
760 | |
447 | |
241 |
The Fortinet Security Fabric brings together the concepts of convergence and consolidation to provide comprehensive cybersecurity protection for all users, devices, and applications and across all network edges.
Copyright 2025 Fortinet, Inc. All Rights Reserved.