site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev@lists.apple.com okay, i just played around a little with this. the responses from the one router were provoked by pinging 224.0.0.9 PING 192.168.0.255 (192.168.0.255): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 192.168.0.102: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.180 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.250: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=1.905 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from 192.168.0.102: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.177 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.250: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.512 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from 192.168.0.102: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.168 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.250: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.723 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from 192.168.0.102: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.176 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.250: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.506 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from 192.168.0.102: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.174 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.250: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=1.648 ms (DUP!) PING 192.168.1.255 (192.168.1.255): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 192.168.1.104: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.295 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.250: icmp_seq=0 ttl=150 time=4.961 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from 192.168.1.250: icmp_seq=0 ttl=150 time=32.736 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from 192.168.1.104: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.265 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.250: icmp_seq=1 ttl=150 time=5.069 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from 192.168.1.104: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.281 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.250: icmp_seq=2 ttl=150 time=4.240 ms (DUP!) 64 bytes from 192.168.1.104: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.265 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.250: icmp_seq=3 ttl=150 time=4.276 ms (DUP!) for each icmp_seq, there is a single pair: my ip (192.168._.10_) router ip (192.168._.250) (not always in that order). thanks. - chase _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.appl... Pinging 224.0.0.2 should get replies from everything that thinks its a router and cares for answering. I'm not sure if it helps but it's something... Of course you still wouldn't get the routes they're routing. hmmm... just tried "ping 224.0.0.2", but it just hangs there, getting no reponses from anything. i like this idea though (in terms of portability). can you help me figure out what i'm doing wrong? i tried pinging 224.0.0.0 thru 224.0.0.100 (and a few toward the top of the range as well), and i could get responses from one of the routers, but not the other. but, again, the other router didn't respond to any of the 224.0.0.xxx pings. BUT... i tried pinging 192.168.0.255 and 192.168.1.255 and i got something very interesting and useful: there are other hosts on both LANs and yet none of those hosts are responding. this is great. i'm not complaining at all. quite the contrary. but, could someone explain why no other hosts on the subnet(s) are responding? i'm obviously missing something key to how messages are broadcast locally. if this turns out to be consistently predictable (pinging the broadcast address of the subnet yields **ONLY** results from oneself and the router on that subnet), then i can just look thru the ping source, pull out the relevant parts, and simply filter out responses from the local address. that should always give me the router address, right? This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com