From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Mon,  4 Jan 2016 05:04:42 -0800
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <f2dfab3cd6a05732cae046105f2e75c2@mule>
In-Reply-To: <20160104105139.GA26700@dinah>
References: <4AE7714E-C18F-4897-ACC1-4F8D35C858AE@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp>
	<2F96B09F-7524-473A-B883-9A7B7DD09978@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp>
	<703dcf90537aeb1ea61012d823f833e5@mule>
	<20160104105139.GA26700@dinah>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] bug or feature ?  --- ip/ping -6
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7e0f276e-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> once said:
> > unfortunately, the simlification removes the code that solves an important
> > use case.  it's important to be able to specify the protocol or network stack,
> > such as in
> >
> > 	ip/ping /net.alt/icmp!someaddress
>
> Most commands use an -x option and setnetmtpt(2) to arrange
> an alternate network root. Is there any reason not to do the
> same for ip/ping?

"most" commands do not.  for example,

	cpu -h /net.alt/tcp!ladd.quanstro.net

sorry i haven't the time to do statistics, but i'm pretty sure that
only programs lib ndb/dnsquery that do not take dial strings are
exceptions here.  and they are self-inconsistent.  some take -x
(bare option) and some take -x /mnt/pt.

that notwithstanding, it seems logical to allow icmpv6!host
as a proper dial string for ping, and this requires the same code.

i think it makes sense to do it as ping and traceroute have done.

- erik