NetDig 1.9 with Windows Mode

  • Thread starter Thread starter William Stacey
  • Start date Start date
W

William Stacey

NetDig 1.9 with Windows mode released. Use console as normal or start a
simple GUI using netdig /win.
Even you console folks may like the windows mode as it's geared for quick
input like the console.

As always, let me know about bugs or feature requests. Cheers and happy
"digging" or should I say netdigging :-)
 
Added cool feature (I think) where you can use wild card IPs and the PTR
type to enum the IP range and show all names or "?" if name could not be
found in the dns.

C:\Temp>netdig 4.2.2.? ptr
;; Resolving 10 addresses in range: 4.2.2.0-4.2.2.9
;; Output in CSV format.
4.2.2.0,?
4.2.2.1,vnsc-pri.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.2,vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.3,vnsc-lc.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.4,vnsc-pri-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.5,vnsc-bak-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.6,vnsc-lc-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.7,?
4.2.2.8,?
4.2.2.9,?

Note usage on wildcards is pretty natural, but should note one thing. You
can use wildcards in any octect, but if the high range of any octect would
be over 255, then the hostname is not concidered a IPRange and is treated
like a hostname unmodified. So for example, the following would not be
valid ranges:
192.168.0.??? => end ip would be x.x.x.999
192.168.0.25? => end ip would be x.x.x.259
192.168.0.[1-256] => end ip x.x.x.256

These work:
192.168.0.* => end ip x.x.x.255
192.168.*.?? => end ip 192.168.255.99
*.*.*.* => entire address space - not recommended.
192.168.?.[1-10] => end ip 192.168.9.10

You can pipe the output into Find to display only records that have a ptr or
not:
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" /v => show only those records that have
ptrs
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" => show only those records that do not
have ptrs

If you got 1.9 already, get it again to see this behavior. Cheers
 
In
William Stacey said:
Added cool feature (I think) where you can use wild card IPs and the
PTR type to enum the IP range and show all names or "?" if name could
not be found in the dns.

C:\Temp>netdig 4.2.2.? ptr
;; Resolving 10 addresses in range: 4.2.2.0-4.2.2.9
;; Output in CSV format.
4.2.2.0,?
4.2.2.1,vnsc-pri.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.2,vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.3,vnsc-lc.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.4,vnsc-pri-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.5,vnsc-bak-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.6,vnsc-lc-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.7,?
4.2.2.8,?
4.2.2.9,?

Note usage on wildcards is pretty natural, but should note one thing.
You can use wildcards in any octect, but if the high range of any
octect would be over 255, then the hostname is not concidered a
IPRange and is treated like a hostname unmodified. So for example,
the following would not be valid ranges:
192.168.0.??? => end ip would be x.x.x.999
192.168.0.25? => end ip would be x.x.x.259
192.168.0.[1-256] => end ip x.x.x.256

These work:
192.168.0.* => end ip x.x.x.255
192.168.*.?? => end ip 192.168.255.99
*.*.*.* => entire address space - not recommended.
192.168.?.[1-10] => end ip 192.168.9.10

You can pipe the output into Find to display only records that have a
ptr or not:
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" /v => show only those records that
have ptrs
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" => show only those records that
do not have ptrs

If you got 1.9 already, get it again to see this behavior. Cheers
Click to expand...

It sounds like it would be more prudent to use the * instead of the ?,
whether using one ? for the digit in the octet or mutliple ?'s for all 3
digits in an octet, unless using a PTR search.

--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies to the newsgroup so all can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2000, MCSE+I, MCSA, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory
 
? represents all digits 0-9. So ?? is 00-99 and ??? is 000-999. 999 is >
255 so that is invalid using our 0-9 method. I suppose I could make one
exception to the rule and say that ??? actually means 0-255 which is
equivelent to just using *. The ?'s allow you to do things like
192.168.0.1? or (192.168.0.10 - 192.168.0.19) where the * would not allow
that finer range. In the end, maybe its confusing and should just allow
bracket shortcut (i.e. [1-22] ) and the * char. Think on it some more and
let me know. Cheers!

--
William Stacey, MVP

"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
In
William Stacey said:
Added cool feature (I think) where you can use wild card IPs and the
PTR type to enum the IP range and show all names or "?" if name could
not be found in the dns.

C:\Temp>netdig 4.2.2.? ptr
;; Resolving 10 addresses in range: 4.2.2.0-4.2.2.9
;; Output in CSV format.
4.2.2.0,?
4.2.2.1,vnsc-pri.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.2,vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.3,vnsc-lc.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.4,vnsc-pri-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.5,vnsc-bak-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.6,vnsc-lc-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.7,?
4.2.2.8,?
4.2.2.9,?

Note usage on wildcards is pretty natural, but should note one thing.
You can use wildcards in any octect, but if the high range of any
octect would be over 255, then the hostname is not concidered a
IPRange and is treated like a hostname unmodified. So for example,
the following would not be valid ranges:
192.168.0.??? => end ip would be x.x.x.999
192.168.0.25? => end ip would be x.x.x.259
192.168.0.[1-256] => end ip x.x.x.256

These work:
192.168.0.* => end ip x.x.x.255
192.168.*.?? => end ip 192.168.255.99
*.*.*.* => entire address space - not recommended.
192.168.?.[1-10] => end ip 192.168.9.10

You can pipe the output into Find to display only records that have a
ptr or not:
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" /v => show only those records that
have ptrs
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" => show only those records that
do not have ptrs

If you got 1.9 already, get it again to see this behavior. Cheers
Click to expand...

It sounds like it would be more prudent to use the * instead of the ?,
whether using one ? for the digit in the octet or mutliple ?'s for all 3
digits in an octet, unless using a PTR search.

--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies to the newsgroup so all can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2000, MCSE+I, MCSA, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory
Click to expand...
 
That would sound good. At least limit it to the valid digits so no errors
will result.
This thing is coming along nicely!
:-)

Ace

In
William Stacey said:
? represents all digits 0-9. So ?? is 00-99 and ??? is 000-999. 999
is > 255 so that is invalid using our 0-9 method. I suppose I could
make one exception to the rule and say that ??? actually means 0-255
which is equivelent to just using *. The ?'s allow you to do things
like 192.168.0.1? or (192.168.0.10 - 192.168.0.19) where the * would
not allow that finer range. In the end, maybe its confusing and
should just allow bracket shortcut (i.e. [1-22] ) and the * char.
Think on it some more and let me know. Cheers!


"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
In
William Stacey said:
Added cool feature (I think) where you can use wild card IPs and the
PTR type to enum the IP range and show all names or "?" if name
could not be found in the dns.

C:\Temp>netdig 4.2.2.? ptr
;; Resolving 10 addresses in range: 4.2.2.0-4.2.2.9
;; Output in CSV format.
4.2.2.0,?
4.2.2.1,vnsc-pri.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.2,vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.3,vnsc-lc.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.4,vnsc-pri-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.5,vnsc-bak-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.6,vnsc-lc-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.7,?
4.2.2.8,?
4.2.2.9,?

Note usage on wildcards is pretty natural, but should note one
thing. You can use wildcards in any octect, but if the high range
of any octect would be over 255, then the hostname is not
concidered a IPRange and is treated like a hostname unmodified. So
for example, the following would not be valid ranges:
192.168.0.??? => end ip would be x.x.x.999
192.168.0.25? => end ip would be x.x.x.259
192.168.0.[1-256] => end ip x.x.x.256

These work:
192.168.0.* => end ip x.x.x.255
192.168.*.?? => end ip 192.168.255.99
*.*.*.* => entire address space - not recommended.
192.168.?.[1-10] => end ip 192.168.9.10

You can pipe the output into Find to display only records that have
a ptr or not:
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" /v => show only those records that
have ptrs
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" => show only those records
that do not have ptrs

If you got 1.9 already, get it again to see this behavior. Cheers
Click to expand...

It sounds like it would be more prudent to use the * instead of the
?, whether using one ? for the digit in the octet or mutliple ?'s
for all 3 digits in an octet, unless using a PTR search.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
So your saying get rid of "?" and just use ranges and the *.

--
William Stacey, MVP

"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
That would sound good. At least limit it to the valid digits so no errors
will result.
This thing is coming along nicely!
:-)

Ace

In
William Stacey said:
? represents all digits 0-9. So ?? is 00-99 and ??? is 000-999. 999
is > 255 so that is invalid using our 0-9 method. I suppose I could
make one exception to the rule and say that ??? actually means 0-255
which is equivelent to just using *. The ?'s allow you to do things
like 192.168.0.1? or (192.168.0.10 - 192.168.0.19) where the * would
not allow that finer range. In the end, maybe its confusing and
should just allow bracket shortcut (i.e. [1-22] ) and the * char.
Think on it some more and let me know. Cheers!


"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
In William Stacey <[email protected]> posted their thoughts, then I
offered mine
Added cool feature (I think) where you can use wild card IPs and the
PTR type to enum the IP range and show all names or "?" if name
could not be found in the dns.

C:\Temp>netdig 4.2.2.? ptr
;; Resolving 10 addresses in range: 4.2.2.0-4.2.2.9
;; Output in CSV format.
4.2.2.0,?
4.2.2.1,vnsc-pri.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.2,vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.3,vnsc-lc.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.4,vnsc-pri-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.5,vnsc-bak-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.6,vnsc-lc-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.7,?
4.2.2.8,?
4.2.2.9,?

Note usage on wildcards is pretty natural, but should note one
thing. You can use wildcards in any octect, but if the high range
of any octect would be over 255, then the hostname is not
concidered a IPRange and is treated like a hostname unmodified. So
for example, the following would not be valid ranges:
192.168.0.??? => end ip would be x.x.x.999
192.168.0.25? => end ip would be x.x.x.259
192.168.0.[1-256] => end ip x.x.x.256

These work:
192.168.0.* => end ip x.x.x.255
192.168.*.?? => end ip 192.168.255.99
*.*.*.* => entire address space - not recommended.
192.168.?.[1-10] => end ip 192.168.9.10

You can pipe the output into Find to display only records that have
a ptr or not:
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" /v => show only those records that
have ptrs
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" => show only those records
that do not have ptrs

If you got 1.9 already, get it again to see this behavior. Cheers

It sounds like it would be more prudent to use the * instead of the
?, whether using one ? for the digit in the octet or mutliple ?'s
for all 3 digits in an octet, unless using a PTR search.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
BTW, do you like the gui mode at all?

--
William Stacey, MVP

"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
That would sound good. At least limit it to the valid digits so no errors
will result.
This thing is coming along nicely!
:-)

Ace

In
William Stacey said:
? represents all digits 0-9. So ?? is 00-99 and ??? is 000-999. 999
is > 255 so that is invalid using our 0-9 method. I suppose I could
make one exception to the rule and say that ??? actually means 0-255
which is equivelent to just using *. The ?'s allow you to do things
like 192.168.0.1? or (192.168.0.10 - 192.168.0.19) where the * would
not allow that finer range. In the end, maybe its confusing and
should just allow bracket shortcut (i.e. [1-22] ) and the * char.
Think on it some more and let me know. Cheers!


"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
In William Stacey <[email protected]> posted their thoughts, then I
offered mine
Added cool feature (I think) where you can use wild card IPs and the
PTR type to enum the IP range and show all names or "?" if name
could not be found in the dns.

C:\Temp>netdig 4.2.2.? ptr
;; Resolving 10 addresses in range: 4.2.2.0-4.2.2.9
;; Output in CSV format.
4.2.2.0,?
4.2.2.1,vnsc-pri.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.2,vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.3,vnsc-lc.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.4,vnsc-pri-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.5,vnsc-bak-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.6,vnsc-lc-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.7,?
4.2.2.8,?
4.2.2.9,?

Note usage on wildcards is pretty natural, but should note one
thing. You can use wildcards in any octect, but if the high range
of any octect would be over 255, then the hostname is not
concidered a IPRange and is treated like a hostname unmodified. So
for example, the following would not be valid ranges:
192.168.0.??? => end ip would be x.x.x.999
192.168.0.25? => end ip would be x.x.x.259
192.168.0.[1-256] => end ip x.x.x.256

These work:
192.168.0.* => end ip x.x.x.255
192.168.*.?? => end ip 192.168.255.99
*.*.*.* => entire address space - not recommended.
192.168.?.[1-10] => end ip 192.168.9.10

You can pipe the output into Find to display only records that have
a ptr or not:
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" /v => show only those records that
have ptrs
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" => show only those records
that do not have ptrs

If you got 1.9 already, get it again to see this behavior. Cheers

It sounds like it would be more prudent to use the * instead of the
?, whether using one ? for the digit in the octet or mutliple ?'s
for all 3 digits in an octet, unless using a PTR search.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
In William Stacey <[email protected]> posted a question
Then Kevin replied below:
: BTW, do you like the gui mode at all?
:
I like it, but I'm going to add a wish to it.
Can you change it to allow the window to be maximized?
And adjust the font size?
I could probably live with the fixed font, it is just a little hard for my
50 year old eyes. I would really like to be able to maximize the window
though. Having to use the bottom and side scroll bars all the time is, well
a pain in the derrière to say the least.
 
That is sounds good. Will probably have to stick with the fixed font to
display the output right, but can change the font size, color, etc. I'll
work on it. Cheers!
 
In William Stacey <[email protected]> posted a question
Then Kevin replied below:
: That is sounds good. Will probably have to stick with the fixed font
: to display the output right, but can change the font size, color,
: etc. I'll work on it. Cheers!
:

Excellent!
When you get done with Netdig, I'm going to have to make a donation to you,
for being a pain in the derrière, myself.
 
No, not entirely. Keep the ? especially for PTR queries. Just I'm saying to
limit the available digits based on the octet limits.
:-)

Ace

In
William Stacey said:
So your saying get rid of "?" and just use ranges and the *.


"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
That would sound good. At least limit it to the valid digits so no
errors will result.
This thing is coming along nicely!
:-)

Ace

In
William Stacey said:
? represents all digits 0-9. So ?? is 00-99 and ??? is 000-999.
999 is > 255 so that is invalid using our 0-9 method. I suppose I
could make one exception to the rule and say that ??? actually
means 0-255 which is equivelent to just using *. The ?'s allow you
to do things like 192.168.0.1? or (192.168.0.10 - 192.168.0.19)
where the * would not allow that finer range. In the end, maybe
its confusing and should just allow bracket shortcut (i.e. [1-22] )
and the * char. Think on it some more and let me know. Cheers!


"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
in message In William Stacey <[email protected]> posted their thoughts,
then I offered mine
Added cool feature (I think) where you can use wild card IPs and
the PTR type to enum the IP range and show all names or "?" if
name could not be found in the dns.

C:\Temp>netdig 4.2.2.? ptr
;; Resolving 10 addresses in range: 4.2.2.0-4.2.2.9
;; Output in CSV format.
4.2.2.0,?
4.2.2.1,vnsc-pri.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.2,vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.3,vnsc-lc.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.4,vnsc-pri-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.5,vnsc-bak-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.6,vnsc-lc-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.7,?
4.2.2.8,?
4.2.2.9,?

Note usage on wildcards is pretty natural, but should note one
thing. You can use wildcards in any octect, but if the high range
of any octect would be over 255, then the hostname is not
concidered a IPRange and is treated like a hostname unmodified.
So for example, the following would not be valid ranges:
192.168.0.??? => end ip would be x.x.x.999
192.168.0.25? => end ip would be x.x.x.259
192.168.0.[1-256] => end ip x.x.x.256

These work:
192.168.0.* => end ip x.x.x.255
192.168.*.?? => end ip 192.168.255.99
*.*.*.* => entire address space - not recommended.
192.168.?.[1-10] => end ip 192.168.9.10

You can pipe the output into Find to display only records that
have a ptr or not:
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" /v => show only those records
that have ptrs
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" => show only those records
that do not have ptrs

If you got 1.9 already, get it again to see this behavior. Cheers

It sounds like it would be more prudent to use the * instead of the
?, whether using one ? for the digit in the octet or mutliple ?'s
for all 3 digits in an octet, unless using a PTR search.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies to the newsgroup so all can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2000, MCSE+I, MCSA, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory
 
Sorry, been busy lately. Barely have time this week to answer posts too!

I like the gui mode, just you don't have all the available switches as in
the command version.

Also, make the window sizable please so it won't wrap or for us to need to
scroll right with the bottom scroll bar. I think Kevin mentioned that too,
at least Kevin and I discussed that earlier tonite. I know he wants bigger
fonts.

:-)

Ace

In
William Stacey said:
BTW, do you like the gui mode at all?


"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
That would sound good. At least limit it to the valid digits so no
errors will result.
This thing is coming along nicely!
:-)

Ace

In
William Stacey said:
? represents all digits 0-9. So ?? is 00-99 and ??? is 000-999.
999 is > 255 so that is invalid using our 0-9 method. I suppose I
could make one exception to the rule and say that ??? actually
means 0-255 which is equivelent to just using *. The ?'s allow you
to do things like 192.168.0.1? or (192.168.0.10 - 192.168.0.19)
where the * would not allow that finer range. In the end, maybe
its confusing and should just allow bracket shortcut (i.e. [1-22] )
and the * char. Think on it some more and let me know. Cheers!


"Ace Fekay [MVP]"
in message In William Stacey <[email protected]> posted their thoughts,
then I offered mine
Added cool feature (I think) where you can use wild card IPs and
the PTR type to enum the IP range and show all names or "?" if
name could not be found in the dns.

C:\Temp>netdig 4.2.2.? ptr
;; Resolving 10 addresses in range: 4.2.2.0-4.2.2.9
;; Output in CSV format.
4.2.2.0,?
4.2.2.1,vnsc-pri.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.2,vnsc-bak.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.3,vnsc-lc.sys.gtei.net.
4.2.2.4,vnsc-pri-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.5,vnsc-bak-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.6,vnsc-lc-dsl.genuity.net.
4.2.2.7,?
4.2.2.8,?
4.2.2.9,?

Note usage on wildcards is pretty natural, but should note one
thing. You can use wildcards in any octect, but if the high range
of any octect would be over 255, then the hostname is not
concidered a IPRange and is treated like a hostname unmodified.
So for example, the following would not be valid ranges:
192.168.0.??? => end ip would be x.x.x.999
192.168.0.25? => end ip would be x.x.x.259
192.168.0.[1-256] => end ip x.x.x.256

These work:
192.168.0.* => end ip x.x.x.255
192.168.*.?? => end ip 192.168.255.99
*.*.*.* => entire address space - not recommended.
192.168.?.[1-10] => end ip 192.168.9.10

You can pipe the output into Find to display only records that
have a ptr or not:
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" /v => show only those records
that have ptrs
netdig 4.2.2.? ptr | find "?" => show only those records
that do not have ptrs

If you got 1.9 already, get it again to see this behavior. Cheers

It sounds like it would be more prudent to use the * instead of the
?, whether using one ? for the digit in the octet or mutliple ?'s
for all 3 digits in an octet, unless using a PTR search.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



--
Regards,
Ace

Please direct all replies to the newsgroup so all can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties.

Ace Fekay, MCSE 2000, MCSE+I, MCSA, MCT, MVP
Microsoft Windows MVP - Active Directory
 
Back
Top