Implement a per-packet timeout (i.e. -W in UNIX ping) about ping HOT 11 CLOSED

Sorry I'm not sure I understand, can you explain what you are trying to accomplish?

from ping.

func worker(addr string, count int) *ping.Statistics {
	pinger, CreateErr := ping.NewPinger(addr)
	if CreateErr != nil {
		panic(CreateErr)
	}
	pinger.SetPrivileged(true)
	pinger.Count = count
	pinger.OnRecv = func(pkt *ping.Packet) {
		fmt.Printf("%d bytes from %s: icmp_seq=%d time=%v\n",
			pkt.Nbytes, pkt.IPAddr, pkt.Seq, pkt.Rtt)
	}
	pinger.Run()
	return pinger.Statistics()
}

func main() {
	s := worker("52.34.112.193",10)
	fmt.Println(s)
}

This is my code, and when I tested it, I found that when the network was not stable enough to recv a packet or two, the count never met and quit the ping program

from ping.

Sorry I'm not sure I understand, can you explain what you are trying to accomplish?

It should exit the ping program after sending 10 packets

from ping.

You can use the Timeout parameter on the Pinger struct, does that work for you?

see https://godoc.org/github.com/sparrc/go-ping#Pinger

from ping.

case <-interval.C:
if p.Count > 0 && p.PacketsSent >= p.Count {
       // before is continue , that is why can't exit pinger
	close(p.done)
	wg.Wait()
}

Timeout this parameter does not meet my requirements...en

from ping.

Fundamentally the pinger "count" option waits for responses after it sends out pings so it can't simply exit immediately after sending 10 pings. This is consistent with the BSD implementation of ping but I suppose it's not consistent with the GNU implementation.

One option would be to make it consistent with the GNU implementation, although I think the BSD implementation seems more reasonable.

Another option would be to implement a per-ping timeout (-W in GNU and BSD ping) in addition to the current overall timeout, though I'm not sure this exactly fills your need because you would need to set the timeout to something where pings could actually be received.

Lastly there could simply be a boolean switch to have the Count parameter act like GNU ping and exit after sending the last ping.

from ping.

My requirement is to send a packet, wait for the duration of receiving a packet, increase the timeout count if failure and exit the program after waiting for receiving 10 packets, regardless of whether the 10 packets have timeouts or not.

I think the Boolean switch is a great option for exiting ping.

from ping.

wait for the duration of receiving a packet

Do you mean you want to wait for Interval seconds, or you want another configurable option for this duration?

from ping.

Yes, wait for interval seconds. When timeout should be interval+timeout to send again

from ping.

First, thank you for this project!

Without per-packet timeout, the problem I see is that when sending a set of probes, the earlier probes have more time to have responses. Say you send two probes, one at each t=0 and t=1 seconds. Then either deadline or control-C stops listening for replies at t=2. If the response time was a constant 1500ms, the first probe would receive a reply but the second would count as a loss. Max response time is equally problematic and tends to increase with larger count.

It's incorrect to interpret the packet loss results of any ping tool as "the client never responded" since the tools can't show that the remote won't reply, say, tomorrow. Of course a delay of hours is unlikely but when dealing with troubled, congested and highly buffered networks, tens of seconds is not unheard of.

Tools and libraries should permit a clear interpretation of packet loss. If you introduce a per-probe timeout, ignore replies past the timeout and wait the duration after sending the last probe, then packet loss can be interpreted as "probes that did not receive a reply within X time". All response times are then bounded.

Side note: What is called 'timeout' in this project is 'deadline' in UNIX ping, and I think the UNIX naming makes sense when both are used. 'Deadline' is when everything has to be done.

Is this something the developers would be interested in seeing added?

from ping.

Looks like I opened a dup: #209

from ping.