4 ms·
They did. They are publicising 1.1.1.1 since it's easy to remember. But they said you can also use 1.0.0.1
by dalore 8y ago
They did. They are publicising 1.1.1.1 since it's easy to remember. But they said you can also use 1.0.0.1
- isostatic 8y agoWhich is really handy. When testing if you're online, running "ping 1.1" is far quicker than "ping 8.8.8.8" or "ping 1.1.1.1"
- snuxoll 8y agoWhy am I today just learning that `ping` will stuff 0's into octets you omit from an address? All of the keystrokes I could have saved and minutes on the phone I could have saved doing `ping 192.168.1` instead!
- a1369209993 8y agoIt's not omitting and it's not just zeros: try `ping 127.256` and `ping 127.65536`.
- JdeBP 8y agoIt's not ping. It's a common C library routine used by quite a number of programs that does this. And this is old behaviour of that library function, that has been around for decades. Here's FreeBSD's library function from 1994, and it was fairly old then: * https://github.com/dspinellis/unix-history-repo/blob/FreeBSD-releng/2.0a/lib/libc/net/inet_addr.c#L103 https://github.com/dspinellis/unix-history-repo/blob/FreeBSD...
- badwolf 8y agoToday I also learned. Thanks!