Merge ping+ping6 and traceroue+traceroute6 to single utilities?

[Jason Hellenthal]

Haha careful 64 might be considered 64bit protocol support ;-) and someone might confuse 46 as a DHCP option rfc2132



-- 
 Jason Hellenthal
 Voice: 95.30.17.6/616
 JJH48-ARIN

On Feb 11, 2014, at 16:55, "Chris H" <bsd-lists at 1command.com> wrote:

>> 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.
> 
> Frankly, I don't see what all the fuss is about. The answer seems so simple;
> Unify it, then call it ping64.
> See, now everyone gets what they want. :)
> Oh, or should that be ping46?
> ...
> 
> --Chris
> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Thomas Steen Rasmussen
>> <thomas at gibfest.dk>wrote:
>> 
>>>> On 11-01-2014 14:36, sthaug at 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 at freebsd.org mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6118 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/attachments/20140211/7ec42a44/attachment.bin>