Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: Why 232 rounds?
From: "Luis MartinGarcia." <luis.mgarc () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:28:59 +0200
On 09/12/2012 09:12 AM, Fyodor wrote:
On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 06:05:25PM -0600, . wrote:In the nping man page, under miscellaneous options, it says that if you put -c 0 as an option nping will stop after 232 rounds. I'm just a little curious, why 232? Shouldn't -c 0 make it run infinitely?Good question. I investigated a bit and found that the Docbook XML source code for the Nping man page actually says: If a value of 0 is specified, Nping will run for 2<superscript>32</superscript> rounds. So it is supposed to render as 2 to the 32nd power (e.g. 4 billion rounds). And it does render correction on the online version of the man page[1], but I have the same problem as you when I read the nroff version. I'll change the man page to just say that Nping runs continuously if '-c 0' is specified. Perhaps it does stop at 4 billion, but I think that's a bug we should fix. Probably just changing it from a 32 to 64 bit integer will do the trick for all practical purposes. I'll add something to the Nmap todo too. Cheers, Fyodor [1] http://nmap.org/book/nping-man-miscellaneous-options.html _______________________________________________
Hi, The easiest way to implement this is exactly as Fyodor suggested, promoting a variable to an unsigned 64-bit integer. I have commited this in r29768, but since the bug is anything but critical, I did that only to my current dev branch at nmap-exp/luis/nmap-npingchanges/nping. I know it looks like this branch is taking forever to be merged into trunk, but I am really planning to do that in the near future ;-) Regards, Luis MartinGarcia. _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/
Current thread:
- Why 232 rounds? . (Sep 09)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Fyodor (Sep 12)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Luis MartinGarcia. (Sep 12)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Fyodor (Sep 12)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Luis MartinGarcia. (Sep 13)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Fyodor (Sep 17)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Luis MartinGarcia. (Sep 12)
- Re: Why 232 rounds? Fyodor (Sep 12)