Sean Estabrooks wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 10:59:57 -0400
Timothy Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
List and network gurus...
I recently had a coworker tell me that we should *always* ping by
*name*, *not* by number. The reason as explained is because the
resolution takes place at a "higher leve
On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 10:59, Timothy Stone wrote:
> List and network gurus...
>
> I recently had a coworker tell me that we should *always* ping by
> *name*, *not* by number. The reason as explained is because the
> resolution takes place at a "higher level" on the OSI stack. And pinging
> the
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 10:59:57 -0400
Timothy Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> List and network gurus...
>
> I recently had a coworker tell me that we should *always* ping by
> *name*, *not* by number. The reason as explained is because the
> resolution takes place at a "higher level" on the OSI
Whether you use the named address in your ping command or not,it's always
going to ping the numeric address. The only thing using the name will do
is show you that DNS is working.
Your "esteemed" colleague is, after all, an MCSE. Unfortunately, I've
only met one or two who could actually spea
List and network gurus...
I recently had a coworker tell me that we should *always* ping by
*name*, *not* by number. The reason as explained is because the
resolution takes place at a "higher level" on the OSI stack. And pinging
the number does nothing but "tell you that the 'connection' to the
