Re: [9fans] multiple pings cause panic

[James Chapman <james@cs.ioc.ee>]

On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:32 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>> term% for (i in `{seq 1 254}) {ip/ping -n 1 192.168.1.1&}
>
> i think you mean
>
>        for(i in `{seq 1 254}){ip/ping -n1 192.168.1.$i}

Sorry, I meant

for(i in `{seq 1 254}){ip/ping -n1 192.168.1.$i&}

I added the & as I didn't want to wait for one to timeout/succeed
before trying the next one.

Is there a more sensible way to do this from rc? I.e. to kick off a
lot of pings at once and collect the results later.

>> panic: Fsprotoclone: all conversations in use
>> panic :Fsprotoclone: all conversations in use
>> dumpstack disabled
>> cpu0: exiting

> nope.  that's the way it's supposed to go.
> the idea is that if all the conversations are used up,
> then your machine is useless and you might as well
> panic.
>
> however, a fair question to ask is, is this limit
> reasonable, and is panicing really the right thing
> to do.

I was expecting that a panic was a bug and I shouldn't be able to cause one.

I'm running a standalone system here but if I wasn't could I bring
down the server like this or only my terminal?