From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 11 09:00:41 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 109A5D4C for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 09:00:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-x236.google.com (mail-qc0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3FE3190D for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 09:00:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id c9so12561520qcz.13 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 01:00:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dataix.net; s=rsa; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=UF2+wLHwzEmlhSJuzK6GZNPi4c9HdH3McXihsf5tKBs=; b=D+vtY9f6lxsynlbQrnt7KLx4ts9lJHAsHrWoIWsK8Aj3THhWH8e0QNcEhFFkUz6gFE wrx6YmR36RoCxXqrjwxfBBxR+mXJpbrLpKz7ZSxo2/Xb8JIYr1DPx+x8HPHt/XkE615R WP05H2c3gP4HjjVlAcXRXF8DBon7NOX4P1lfQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=UF2+wLHwzEmlhSJuzK6GZNPi4c9HdH3McXihsf5tKBs=; b=JiAddRlHyP7irmrJvi2/cy69TTcFMd4BirB0BmzPoqiWZjCdOptgRSwqU5/Nn1RasS lSX90NtzzBnnZ8wjrPrvQb0StL09HqwkVvmEOSW42bND4JTvTUH/wBDasN74Usz4u57p IMcDQtrxXI+7+Jjp/DGYSQMXZEP4Xr7eoZyhd6MCdUr0DYqfNwoGLUPISbFmI8GZ/hmd ITKtYnd2QowgUwTf6kYCaylsBheJj/36byaTIkkA8IHXvu7+anfgUf39wXkME/rVb8wj 8Q/7KJO1XDDBqg0gduifCSq0x/mpsNZKEw2KMcE2CX2ieYIu1k88yOv13KAhg9lOteT+ Ao2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQleIIyRyJdMftxVUKGGEH/6e7Zmg/TguKw+kF8cYF+8m48tYpMxeGaKHACvmH21KkSOyII5 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.82.175 with SMTP id h44mr52550099qgd.68.1392109239910; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 01:00:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.140.97.75 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 01:00:39 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [75.128.101.59] In-Reply-To: <52D15185.50802@gibfest.dk> References: <1063008459.20140111160525@serebryakov.spb.ru> <52D14140.3090003@gibfest.dk> <20140111.143644.41639035.sthaug@nethelp.no> <52D15185.50802@gibfest.dk> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 04:00:39 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Merge ping+ping6 and traceroue+traceroute6 to single utilities? From: Jason Hellenthal To: Thomas Steen Rasmussen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 Cc: lev@freebsd.org, sthaug@nethelp.no, "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 09:00:41 -0000 If you don't mind me saying... That is utter BS without the D. Doing it right and merging these two would leave for more constructive use. Nobody is saying that it really needs to perform v6 & v4 without interaction in the form of the user adding a switch and there is no reason that by default it could not just default to using 4 only leaving room for a later point to just switch its default to v6 when that time comes and calls for it. Secondly just because they would be merged does not mean there won't or can't be a convention of detecting how the program was called. Symlink ping to ping6 for interchangeability sake and the same could be done whenever the default for ping would change to v6 by Symlinking ping to ping4. And there is no reason why ping could not just do both and you as the operator pick up the tab and just learn to call ping4 when you need to. Quite frankly I am tired of seeing the old pessimism and paradigms that projects keep falling into over silly little subtle changes. ping localhost ("grab any name, you just want to know its alive") ping 127.0.0.1 ("you know you are pinging v4 without a doubt") ping ::1 ("you also know you are pinging v6 without a doubt") ping -4 localhost ("you know you are getting v4 without a doubt") ping -6 localhost ("you know you are getting v6 without a doubt") ping -4 ::1 ("must be retarded in some way") There is no reason whatsoever that these utilities cannot be combined. And there is one very valid reason they should be. Maybe someone should call fyodor and ask him to make a nmap6 and a nping6 to follow convention while the rest of the platforms work on combining. On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Thomas Steen Rasmussen wrote: > On 11-01-2014 14:36, sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: > >> Normal network enabled utilities like telnet or ftp or nc support >>> both because when using those you usually don't care about the >>> address family used, you just want to connect. This is a significant >>> difference from using ping or traceroute where you almost always >>> want a specific address family, depending on what you are testing. >>> >> I strongly disagree with the "almost always want a specific address >> family". I normally want to verify that the IP at the other end is >> alive, or get some idea of how to get there. If I want a specific >> address family I'm very happy to use -4 / -6 options. >> > > The IP at the other end will, by definition, always be either v4 or v6, > so yes, you do want a specific address family - namely the family your > IP belongs to. > > > Best regards, > > Thomas Steen Rasmussen > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >