Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 02:19:46 +0100 From: Steve Roome <stephen_roome@yahoo.com> To: "David O'Brien" <dev-null@NUXI.com> Cc: Keith Stevenson <keith.stevenson@louisville.edu>, Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Should URL's be pervasive. Message-ID: <20010903021946.A377@dylan.home> In-Reply-To: <20010831153409.A27173@dragon.nuxi.com>; from dev-null@NUXI.com on Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 03:34:09PM -0700 References: <20010830111018.A97057@ussenterprise.ufp.org> <20010830111708.A20961@osaka.louisville.edu> <20010830232109.A1077@dylan.home> <20010831153409.A27173@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 03:34:09PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 11:21:09PM +0100, Steve Roome wrote: > > ping http://www.myserver.wherever/ > > instead of telnet wherever 80, just to see if I get a connected or > > not ? > > Do you have *ANY* clue how ping works? Ping uses ICMP packets; not TCP, > not UDP -- thus there is NO concept of ports. And what does "instead of > telnet mean"?? Again, do you have any clue how ping works? I certainly understand that ping currently works on ICMP, and that a feature enhancement to allow it to use a different type of packet might be, perhaps to some, a useful addition to its capability. Considering, for example, that an ICMP packet may take a very different route to (and hence time to reach) the destination machine comparted to a TCP/IP packet containing http information it might not be such a bad idea. e.g. Transparent web proxies. Had you read the thread of course, you may have noticed that I was merely replying to someone else who has asked about this sort of functionality. But feel free to take a dig at _me_ anyway, I won't be frightened away from it all just yet. Luckily I'm not a new user who's going to take harshly and hate us bloody arrogant unix zealots though. > To the person that wants to "traceroute http://www.myserver.wherever/", > do you have *ANY* clue how traceroute works? You cannnot use a port that > something is answering on. Again, if you've got a transparent web proxy in the way, this would be a really nice feature. I've not got a clue how to implement it though, it would probably involve changing the way rather a lot of network hardware works, I just commented on it. Steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010903021946.A377>