fix(all): pcapkit.all lists OSPF on the Link Layer line

[JarryShaw]

• Searched for similar pull requests
• Followed the coding style (make pylint, make mypy, make isort) — ran pylint/mypy/isort on both files: isort clean, mypy no hits in all.py; pylint reports a pre-existing line-too-long at all.py:126 and the test's in-method imports and missing docstrings, which match test_layer_placement_unit.py's style
• make test passes, and a test case covers the change — ran the new module, tests/project/test_public_api.py, tests/protocols/application/test_layer_placement_unit.py, and tests/project
• Added a changelog entry — N/A, added centrally after the wave

What is the purpose of your pull request?

• fix — corrects a defect

---

Description of your pull request and other information

Closes #1124. OSPF, RARP and DRARP sat on the Link Layer line of pcapkit/all.py's __all__, with a comment admitting they are application-layer (#719). All three now sit in the Application Layer group, and the comment is gone. all.py imports with from pcapkit.protocols import *, so __all__ is the only change.

Probe (group read from the source): before, Link = ARP C_Tag DRARP Ethernet InARP L2TP L2TPv2 OSPF RARP S_Tag VLAN; after, Link = ARP C_Tag Ethernet InARP L2TP L2TPv2 S_Tag VLAN, Application = FTP FTP_DATA HTTP NGAP OSPF RARP DRARP.

Test: tests/project/test_all_layer_grouping_unit.py tokenizes all.py and checks every exported class's __layer__ against its group. Without the fix: 5 failed, 3 passed; with it: 5 passed, 3 subtests passed. test_public_api.py 10 passed; test_layer_placement_unit.py 17 passed; tests/project 384 passed, 1 skipped.

[JarryShaw]

Cross-review verdict on fa60acf4e: NEEDS CHANGES (ran on Sonnet; author Opus). The fix is correct; one test-robustness change is needed.

Change needed: if a group comment is renamed, mark() calls next(...) with no default. Every test then errors in setUpClass with RuntimeError: generator raised StopIteration, and the error does not say which comment is missing. Raise an AssertionError that names the missing comment instead.

Verified:

• OSPF, RARP and DRARP have __layer__ == 'Application', consistent with feat(protocols)!: move OSPF and RARP to the application layer (#719) #1031.
• Restoring all.py from main makes the new module fail 5.
• Seven mutations were tried: wrong group, a duplicate entry, and moving TCP, HTTP, ARP and IPv4. Every one is caught.
• test_public_api and test_layer_placement_unit pass.

[JarryShaw]

Cross-review verdict on 9e84ff0dd: GOOD TO GO (ran on Sonnet; author Opus, round 2)

• Group comments: mark() now matches the label exactly. If a comment is missing it raises a named AssertionError. Renaming it to # Transport Protocols or # Transport Layers (the old prefix-match hole) gives that assertion; restored, the module passes.
• all.py: unchanged from round 1.
  • OSPF, RARP and DRARP report __layer__ == 'Application'.
  • With main's all.py, the new module fails 5.
  • All 7 group mutations are caught.

The wider gap, names missing from pcapkit.all.__all__, is #1136.

[github-actions]

Coverage: 88.74% (unit tier, Python 3.14, 9e84ff0dd, Unit Tests run success)

Package	Statements	Missed	Branches	Partial	Cover
pcapkit (top level)	104	4	20	4	93.55%
pcapkit/const	18757	1035	2342	846	90.23%
pcapkit/corekit	1874	91	578	22	94.33%
pcapkit/dumpkit	136	0	40	0	100.00%
pcapkit/foundation	2422	143	842	34	92.62%
pcapkit/interface	112	7	40	5	92.11%
pcapkit/protocols	15653	187	3942	162	98.19%
pcapkit/toolkit	487	71	144	3	84.15%
pcapkit/utilities	429	4	122	4	98.55%
pcapkit/vendor	4409	2359	1006	158	42.84%

Per-file detail: the coverage-html artifact of this run.