[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ping message

On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Christian Kurz wrote:

> If you are really doing professional services then you should know how
> to tell your mailer to only send a mail to the list or either insert an
> appropriate comment telling me, that you also send me a unnessary copy
> to my private address. 

This is always a person-by-person opinion. Some people don't want copies
(because they assume that others know that they always read the list in a 
timely matter), some want copies (to make sure they read it), some want
comments that tell them that it is also copied ... Since I now know your
preference, I'll try to remember.

> I don't know which source you are looking at, but I'm looking at the
> source for iputils from ftp://ftp.inr.ac.ru/ip-routing/. If you look
> there at the functions pr_pack and main you'll notice that pr_pack is
> called with a variable containing the received_time which is as far as I
> understand calculated from the time (gettimeofday). And this time value

I may have been looking at different code. If I recall correctly it only
used gettimeofday() if it was using the old behaviour (as mentioned in the
manual page).

I was looking at iputils_20001110.orig.tar.gz as downloaded from debian's
site.  The manual page contains "iputils-ss990107".

> > I believe -U uses different functionality (old feature) and
> > bypasses this problem.
> -U does what? The version of ping that I use here doesn't know about
> that switch.

As mentioned in another email by Fernando, his ping does have that
feature. I guess you are using a different ping. (And my ping doesn't have
that feature either.)

     -U      Print true user-to-user latency (the old behaviour).

I don't use that ping. I have came across well over 20 messages about this
problem. Some of these messages indicated the upgrading to a newer kernel,
or using "-U", or using an older ping fixed their problem.

Feel free to ask the developer pekkas @ netcore.fi what he means by
"SIOCGSTAMP/SO_TIMESTAMP are sensitive to bug in kernel" and if this
applies to this.

  Jeremy C. Reed
echo '9,J8HD,fDGG8B@?:536FC5=8@I;C5?@H5B0D@5GBIELD54DL>@8L?:5GDEJ8LDG1' |\
sed ss,s50EBsg | tr 0-M 'p.wBt SgiIlxmLhan:o,erDsduv/cyP'

Reply to: