If I where redesigning ping I wouldn't repeat any info that is common on each line - I.e. ip addresses or the column titles: rtt, ave etc.
consider plan9's ps(1) which has no column titles. they are described in the man page and are obvious from the context once you have read the man page once. Having said this, I understand that tradition is also a strong guiding principal. -Steve > On 30 Dec 2015, at 12:48, arisawa <aris...@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> wrote: > > hello, > > is the following output of ping reasonable enough? > > > io% 6.ping -an3 hebe > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmp!192.168.0.6!1 > 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 > 0: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 88 µs, avg rtt 88 µs, ttl = 255 > 1: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 83 µs, avg rtt 85 µs, ttl = 255 > 2: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 80 µs, avg rtt 83 µs, ttl = 255 > > io% 6.ping -an3 192.168.0.6 > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmp!192.168.0.6!1 > 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 > 0: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 107 µs, avg rtt 107 µs, ttl = 255 > 1: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 84 µs, avg rtt 95 µs, ttl = 255 > 2: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 95 µs, avg rtt 95 µs, ttl = 255 > > io% 6.ping -an3 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6!1 > 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > 0: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 103 µs, avg rtt 103 > µs, ttl = 255 > 1: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 96 µs, avg rtt 99 µs, > ttl = 255 > 2: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 83 µs, avg rtt 94 µs, > ttl = 255 > > io% 6.ping -6an3 hebe > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6!1 > 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > 0: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 101 µs, avg rtt 101 > µs, ttl = 255 > 1: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 82 µs, avg rtt 91 µs, > ttl = 255 > 2: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 89 µs, avg rtt 90 µs, > ttl = 255 > > io% 6.ping -6an3 192.168.0.6 > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmp!192.168.0.6!1 > 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 > 0: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 90 µs, avg rtt 90 µs, ttl = 255 > 1: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 94 µs, avg rtt 92 µs, ttl = 255 > 2: 192.168.0.6 -> 192.168.0.5 rtt 90 µs, avg rtt 91 µs, ttl = 255 > > io% 6.ping -6an3 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > sending 3 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6!1 > 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 > 0: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 101 µs, avg rtt 101 > µs, ttl = 255 > 1: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 272 µs, avg rtt 186 > µs, ttl = 255 > 2: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 rtt 102 µs, avg rtt 158 > µs, ttl = 255 > > code is simplified. > > io% ls -l > --rw-rw-r-- M 327 arisawa arisawa 9942 Dec 30 21:27 ping.c > --rw-rw-r-- M 327 arisawa arisawa 10943 Dec 28 15:59 ping.c.orig > io% > > Kenji Arisawa > > > >> 2015/12/28 18:04、arisawa <aris...@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp> のメール： >> >> hello 9fans, >> >> I have once posted the message below to 9front mailing list. >> however looking the origin of the problem, now I think better place is 9fans. >> >> == message posted to 9front mailing list == >> >> I am feeling weird that ip/ping -6 does not ping to ipv6 address with >> /lib/ndb/local. >> >> # sys=io >> # ip=192.168.0.5 >> # ip=2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 >> # >> hebe% ip/ping -6a io >> sending 32 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!io!1 >> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 192.168.0.5 >> 0: 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 rtt 104 µs, avg rtt 104 µs, ttl = 255 >> 1: 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 rtt 85 µs, avg rtt 94 µs, ttl = 255 >> 2: 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 rtt 85 µs, avg rtt 91 µs, ttl = 255 >> 3: 192.168.0.5 -> 192.168.0.6 rtt 85 µs, avg rtt 89 µs, ttl = 255 >> >> this weirdness comes from the order of ip attributes. >> >> # sys=io >> # ip=2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 >> # ip=192.168.0.5 >> # >> hebe% ip/ping -6a io >> sending 32 64 byte messages 1000 ms apart to icmpv6!io!1 >> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 >> 0: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 rtt 102 µs, avg rtt 102 >> µs, ttl = 255 >> 1: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 rtt 88 µs, avg rtt 95 >> µs, ttl = 255 >> 2: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 rtt 84 µs, avg rtt 91 >> µs, ttl = 255 >> 3: 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::5 -> 2402:6b00:22cd:bf80::6 rtt 104 µs, avg rtt 94 >> µs, ttl = 255 >> >> is this a feature or a bug? >> >> Kenji Arisawa >
