Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 07:59:27 -0400 From: Matthew Hunt <hunt@mph124.rh.psu.edu> To: spork <spork@super-g.com> Cc: Michael Richards <026809r@dragon.acadiau.ca>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Ping bug? Message-ID: <19970905075927.37717@mph124.rh.psu.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970905002449.1062C-100000@super-g.inch.com>; from spork on Fri, Sep 05, 1997 at 12:28:28AM -0400 References: <199709050210.XAA19228@dragon.acadiau.ca> <Pine.BSF.3.96.970905002449.1062C-100000@super-g.inch.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 05, 1997 at 12:28:28AM -0400, spork wrote:
> very slick tool, but to make a long story short, I was looking at stealing
> the ping they wrote that incorporates a very short ping time. Perfect for
> checking local hosts or sweeping through a range of IPs to see who's up
Also, fping in /usr/ports/net/fping may be appropriate.
A tool to quickly ping N number of hosts to determine their reachability
without flooding the network.
fping is different from ping in that you can specify any number of
hosts on the command line, or specify a file containing the lists
of hosts to ping. Instead of trying one host until it timeouts or
replies, fping will send out a ping packet and move on to the next
host in a round-robin fashion. If a host replies, it is noted and
removed from the list of hosts to check. If a host does not respond
within a certain time limit and/or retry limit it will be considered
unreachable.
Unlike ping, fping is meant to be used in scripts and its
output is easy to parse.
--
Matthew Hunt <mph@pobox.com> * Think locally, act globally.
finger hunt@mph124.rh.psu.edu for PGP public key.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970905075927.37717>