RE: Suggested patch

["Carl-Johan Bostorp" <carl-johan.bostorp () hps se>]

Well, here's the thing. I expected the program not to ping anything, therefor I used -P0. The program didn't perform as 
expected, and if you agree that -P0 actually should mean "Do not use any form of ping" then by logic, this patch should 
be applied. If I did want it to ARP ping, I would've used -PR, but I didn't want that.

The situation that triggered this was an erroneous netmask on the interface. The routing however was set up correctly, 
so I decided not to modify anything on account of me not having physical access to the machine in case the network went 
down.

/C-J

(p.s., I'm not on the list so Cc:ing replies to me is a good idea if you want further input from me)


-----Original Message-----
From: Richard van den Berg [mailto:richard.vandenberg () ins com]
Sent: on 2006-01-25 12:25
To: Carl-Johan Bostorp
Cc: nmap-dev () insecure org
Subject: Re: Suggested patch
 
Carl-Johan Bostorp wrote:
> I came across a situation where I didn't want nmap to even do ARP ping
> on the localnet, and found out that -P0 didn't work as I expected then.
> Here's a patch to fix that.
>   
There is no need for this patch. Simply use |--send-ip as documented
here http://www.insecure.org/nmap/man/man-host-discovery.html

|Sincerely,

Richard van den Berg



_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev