just "ping"

[1/3] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 16-Aug-2002 9:29

Ken Cadby wrote:

>That's all I want, for now. It's not in the library, it's not built in, and it's not in any examples in the docs, unless I'm missing something? > >I don't care about the discussion about which protocol is "correct" or whatever the technicality or explanation was before (I don't remember) about why it's not a standard tool in rebol. I just want to be able to enter an ip address, and see if I can get an echo response (or anything similar) from that machine. > >Is that too much to ask rebol to do? > >Sorry for sounding sarcastic. I suppose I am showing my own incompetence, after all. >

you are and you are not. Forget ping - we were said it requires root access on Unix, so it is not in-there. Many ppl requested it. I thought that Rebol could check for rights somehow, but I can't know Rebol internals of course. Or just buy /Pro version and use shell access to call it. I just wonder, how does /call changes it. Because, RT refused to add ping because of above reasons and also because such scripts would not be probably as cross-platform as they could be, while paying for /Pro version seems to remove such POV. It is sad, that we are being driven by "if you want to break cross-platform usage, pay for it" attitude. I said it endless times, that /library and /shell components should be freed, or Rebol will stay in isolation and we will see sarcastic reactions as yours ... in the better case ... as in the worse case ... we loose other person interested in language ... and quite frankly, that's imo much higher price than those 100 USD we are supposed to pay for /Pro version. But then - I may be stupid and missing something obvious, what makes RT to stick with the situation as it is ... -pekr-

[2/3] from: rebollist::juicybits::com at: 16-Aug-2002 0:10

That's all I want, for now. It's not in the library, it's not built in, and it's not in any examples in the docs, unless I'm missing something? I don't care about the discussion about which protocol is "correct" or whatever the technicality or explanation was before (I don't remember) about why it's not a standard tool in rebol. I just want to be able to enter an ip address, and see if I can get an echo response (or anything similar) from that machine. Is that too much to ask rebol to do? Sorry for sounding sarcastic. I suppose I am showing my own incompetence, after all. --Ken. ____________________________ ____________________________ Ah, you hate Microsoft too! So comrade, ven do vee plan to defect?

[3/3] from: g:santilli:tiscalinet:it at: 16-Aug-2002 13:41

Hi Ken, On Friday, August 16, 2002, 9:10:47 AM, you wrote: KC> That's all I want, for now. It's not in the library, it's not built in, KC> and it's not in any examples in the docs, unless I'm missing something? The ICMP protocol is not a user protocol, so REBOL does not handle it; if you want more detailed reasons, or just want to complain about it, please contact RT. KC> want to be able to enter an ip address, and see if I can get an echo response KC> (or anything similar) from that machine. Both TCP and UDP provide standard echo ports. That service is usually disabled on most servers (for obvious reasons), but servers will have ICMP echo disabled too in most cases; so, you may want to try something like:

>> port: open/no-wait tcp://target.machine:7 >> insert port "PING" >> copy port

== "PING"

>> close port

KC> Is that too much to ask rebol to do? Well, you've got the ping command, what is reinventing the wheel useful for? <evil grin> ;-) Regards, Gabriele. -- Gabriele Santilli <[g--santilli--tiscalinet--it]> -- REBOL Programmer Amigan -- AGI L'Aquila -- REB: http://web.tiscali.it/rebol/index.r