Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pyrdc!pyrnj!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu!karl
From: karl@triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: ICMP's & IP src addrs
Message-ID: <21843@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 15 Sep 88 17:37:25 GMT
References: <23634@hi.unm.edu> <8809151450.AA23101@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Lines: 24
In-reply-to: tmallory@park-street.bbn.com's message of 15 Sep 88 13:04:17 GMT

As long as I was at it, I decided to look at what a large collection
of diverse machines did with pings to .255.  I hit our backbone
ethernet (128.146.8, a little over 100 hosts) with a ping like this,
and the results are:

Responding with 128.146.8.255:
Sun-3/180 (SunOS 3.5.1 [UNIX]).

Responding with their own addresses:
HP-9000 (HP-UX [UNIX]), IBM-RT/PC (Mach), Proteon P4200, BBN Butterfly
(Mach), Pyramid (OSx 4.x [UNIX]), Encore Annex telnet server.

Not responding:
DEC-2060 (TOPS 6.1; responds to direct ping), AT&T 3B2/400 (SysV
Rel3.0 + TWG WIN; responds to direct ping), Kinetics Mac gateways
(KIP; doesn't respond to direct ping), Encore Multimax (Umax 4.2;
responds to direct ping), TI Explorer (Zetalisp; responds to direct
ping), Xerox-1108 (Interlisp; responds to direct ping).

Also, we have one HP-9000 client subnet.  When pinging that subnet's
broadcast addr (128.146.43.255), *only the server* responded - the
rest were silent.  Weird.

--Karl