Re: why broadcast on *.0 (network) addresses ?

Richard B. Johnson (root@chaos.analogic.com)
Wed, 27 Jan 1999 10:17:04 -0500 (EST)


On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Harald Koenig wrote:

> why do I get
>
> 64 bytes from 134.2.170.66: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2.4 ms (DUP!)
>
> when I run
>
> ping 134.2.170.0
>

If you ping the network address, you will get a response from every
host on your local network! This is correct. Some versions of ping
prevent you pinging the network address or a broadcast address.

Script started on Wed Jan 27 10:10:00 1999
# ping 204.178.40.0
PING 204.178.40.0 (204.178.40.0): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 204.178.40.224: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=0.1 ms
64 bytes from 204.178.47.187: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=1.8 ms (DUP!)
64 bytes from 204.178.40.210: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=1.9 ms (DUP!)
64 bytes from 204.178.40.208: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=1.9 ms (DUP!)
64 bytes from 204.178.40.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=2.1 ms (DUP!)
64 bytes from 204.178.47.140: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=2.1 ms (DUP!)
64 bytes from 204.178.45.185: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=2.1 ms (DUP!)
[SNIPPED hundreds of responses]

FYI, SNMP (Simplified network management protocol) programs often
find the machines that are alive on the local network by doing this.

M$CRAP machines ARP every possible machine, rather than sending
one ICMP request and sorting the answers, which makes M$CRAP a
bad network neighbor.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
Penguin : Linux version 2.1.131 on an i686 machine (400.59 BogoMips).
Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology.
Wisdom : It's not a Y2K problem. It's a Y2Day problem.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/