Collin Funk <collin.fu...@gmail.com> writes: > "Alfred M. Szmidt" <a...@gnu.org> writes: > >> ping is for IPv4, ping5 is for IPv6. There is nothing "legacy" about >> IPv4. Use the right command for the right task. > > I generally agree. Having both a ping and ping6 commands seems fairly > common. > > I wouldn't mind having 'ping' support both IPv4 and IPv6 with arguments > to chose though. I think that was even but in the TODO file long ago. > But I am in no rush to do so.
Yes, I think the current user interface is mostly a consequence of the ping vs ping6 tools having low code re-use between them. I think it should be one tool and have parameter for -4 and -6 just like many other ping implementations. I disagree with Anna and think that IPv4 should still be the default, although I think we should be open to revisit this in a few years if IPv4 availability lowers (which I'm not seeing any signs of). Even if we merge the IPv6 functionality into 'ping', I still think we should install a 'ping6' symlink because that interface is worth supporting too (for Anna's use-case, for example). /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
