From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 References: <4AE7714E-C18F-4897-ACC1-4F8D35C858AE@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> <2F96B09F-7524-473A-B883-9A7B7DD09978@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> From: Steve Simon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <2F96B09F-7524-473A-B883-9A7B7DD09978@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> Message-Id: <18123F6C-5742-4E3D-906F-A7D4D8C40412@quintile.net> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:05:33 +0000 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: [9fans] bug or feature ? --- ip/ping -6 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7b5926a0-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 If I where redesigning ping I wouldn't repeat any info that is common on eac= h line - I.e. ip addresses or the column titles: rtt, ave etc. consider plan9's ps(1) which has no column titles. they are described in the= man page and are obvious from the context once you have read the man page o= nce. Having said this, I understand that tradition is also a strong guiding princ= ipal. -Steve > On 30 Dec 2015, at 12:48, arisawa wrote: >=20 > hello, >=20 > is the following output of ping reasonable enough? >=20 >=20 > io% 6.ping -an3 hebe > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmp!192.168.0.6!1 > 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 > 0: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 88 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 88 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 2= 55 > 1: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 83 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 85 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 2= 55 > 2: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 80 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 83 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 2= 55 >=20 > io% 6.ping -an3 192.168.0.6 > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmp!192.168.0.6!1 > 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 > 0: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 107 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 107 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D= 255 > 1: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 84 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 95 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 2= 55 > 2: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 95 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 95 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 2= 55 >=20 > io% 6.ping -an3 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6!= 1 > 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > 0: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 103 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 103 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 > 1: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 96 =C2=B5s, avg rt= t 99 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 > 2: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 83 =C2=B5s, avg rt= t 94 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 >=20 > io% 6.ping -6an3 hebe > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6!= 1 > 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > 0: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 101 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 101 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 > 1: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 82 =C2=B5s, avg rt= t 91 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 > 2: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 89 =C2=B5s, avg rt= t 90 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 >=20 > io% 6.ping -6an3 192.168.0.6 > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmp!192.168.0.6!1 > 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 > 0: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 90 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 90 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 2= 55 > 1: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 94 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 92 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 2= 55 > 2: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 90 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 91 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 2= 55 >=20 > io% 6.ping -6an3 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6!= 1 > 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > 0: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 101 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 101 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 > 1: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 272 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 186 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 > 2: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 102 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 158 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 >=20 > code is simplified. >=20 > io% ls -l > --rw-rw-r-- M 327 arisawa arisawa 9942 Dec 30 21:27 ping.c > --rw-rw-r-- M 327 arisawa arisawa 10943 Dec 28 15:59 ping.c.orig > io%=20 >=20 > Kenji Arisawa >=20 >=20 >=20 >> 2015/12/28 18:04=E3=80=81arisawa =E3=81=AE=E3=83= =A1=E3=83=BC=E3=83=AB=EF=BC=9A >>=20 >> hello 9fans, >>=20 >> I have once posted the message below to 9front mailing list. >> however looking the origin of the problem, now I think better place is 9f= ans. >>=20 >> =3D=3D message posted to 9front mailing list =3D=3D >>=20 >> I am feeling weird that ip/ping -6 does not ping to ipv6 address with /li= b/ndb/local. >>=20 >> # sys=3Dio >> # ip=3D192.168.0.5 >> # ip=3D2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 >> # >> hebe% ip/ping -6a io >> sending 32 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!io!1 >> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 192.168.0.5 >> 0: 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 rtt 104 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 104 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D= 255 >> 1: 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 rtt 85 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 94 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D= 255 >> 2: 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 rtt 85 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 91 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D= 255 >> 3: 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 rtt 85 =C2=B5s, avg rtt 89 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D= 255 >>=20 >> this weirdness comes from the order of ip attributes. >>=20 >> # sys=3Dio >> # ip=3D2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 >> # ip=3D192.168.0.5 >> # >> hebe% ip/ping -6a io >> sending 32 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!io!1 >> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 >> 0: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 rtt 102 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 102 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 >> 1: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 rtt 88 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 95 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 >> 2: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 rtt 84 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 91 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 >> 3: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 rtt 104 =C2=B5s, avg r= tt 94 =C2=B5s, ttl =3D 255 >>=20 >> is this a feature or a bug? >>=20 >> Kenji Arisawa >=20