Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021/02/20 09:20, Remi Locherer wrote:
> > On February 19, 2021 8:56:31 PM UTC, Stuart Henderson
> > wrote:
> > >Canvassing opinions on having . and ! this way around. I'm using . for
> > >response, ! for no response, which makes more sense to me but it's been
> > >
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 04:32:24PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> That's a good point about -f. I was thinking . is similar to how
> it looks in -f output, but really the "."s build up when there are no
> replies and it prints a backspace for a received response.
> I've had offlist replies in fav
On 2021/02/20 09:20, Remi Locherer wrote:
> On February 19, 2021 8:56:31 PM UTC, Stuart Henderson
> wrote:
> >Canvassing opinions on having . and ! this way around. I'm using . for
> >response, ! for no response, which makes more sense to me but it's been
> >pointed out that it's the opposite of
On February 19, 2021 8:56:31 PM UTC, Stuart Henderson
wrote:
>Canvassing opinions on having . and ! this way around. I'm using . for
>response, ! for no response, which makes more sense to me but it's been
>pointed out that it's the opposite of what cisco does so it might
>confuse
>some people.
Canvassing opinions on having . and ! this way around. I'm using . for
response, ! for no response, which makes more sense to me but it's been
pointed out that it's the opposite of what cisco does so it might confuse
some people.
Hey,
i really like this representation of the results. Very usefull to keep
an eye on a lot of hosts during network related debugging.
Works fine for me. This just as feedback for you.
Greetings
Leo
Am 19.02.2021 um 16:19 schrieb Stuart Henderson:
This diff adds something similar to cisco's p
On 2021/02/19 15:19, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> This diff adds something similar to cisco's ping display, giving a
> visual display of good/dropped pings. Any interest in it? Example
> output (with a couple of ^T during the run):
>
> $ ping -g 192.168.41.21
> PING 192.168.41.21 (192.168.41.21): 56
As a WISP manager always experiencing spaced-but-repeated packet-loss
mayhem, I'm loving it.
El vie, 19 feb 2021 a las 16:22, Stuart Henderson
() escribió:
>
> This diff adds something similar to cisco's ping display, giving a
> visual display of good/dropped pings. Any interest in it? Example
> o
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 03:19:49PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> This diff adds something similar to cisco's ping display, giving a
> visual display of good/dropped pings. Any interest in it? Example
> output (with a couple of ^T during the run):
fwiw, noping from net/liboping in ports has this
On 2021/02/19 15:19, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> This diff adds something similar to cisco's ping display, giving a
> visual display of good/dropped pings. Any interest in it? Example
> output (with a couple of ^T during the run):
(as is traditional I forgot to update usage(), I've fixed that locall
This diff adds something similar to cisco's ping display, giving a
visual display of good/dropped pings. Any interest in it? Example
output (with a couple of ^T during the run):
$ ping -g 192.168.41.21
PING 192.168.41.21 (192.168.41.21): 56 data bytes
.
11 matches
Mail list logo
