-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

I'm not sure if this post comes under topic for this list, or right
place to clear my networking doubts, so tagging this post "[OT]".

I've traceroute-d hundreds of hosts and noticed some of the routers in
the routes or endpoint hosts prefer not to respond to traceroute's
i.e. not to send a TTL exceeded ICMP packet back to the host. As I
don't have any experience of working in a large network, so if someone
could tell me sysadmins used to creates such rules in their firewall,
like dropping TTL exceeded ICMP packets (dropping such packets in
their OUTPUT chain of their *iptables*, if they're running some Linux
router) .

I used to traceroute in unprivileged user mode, which is using UDP
probes. So do these sysadmins prefer blocking ICMP "TTL exceeded"
replies for UDP packets, than ICMP "TTL exceeded" for ICMP ECHO
packets, hmm... ? Or there is no such thing like blocking ICMP "TTL
exceeded" reply associated with a UDP packet, hmm... ?

What's the difference between a router and a endpoint host from
point-of-view of traceroute ?

Why some endpoint host, which has been blocking ICMP "TTL exceeded" for
UDP packet, is allowing "traceroute" associated with a UDP packet
for a listening port. This I encountered while trying to "traceroute
66.179.175.2". I've posted the whole experience at following URL:

http://wahjava.wordpress.com/2007/09/22/why-some-servers-dont-respond-to-default-traceroute/

BtW, above host can be tracerouted using ICMP but not UDP:

- -- begin dump --
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ sudo traceroute -n -I 66.179.175.2
Password:
traceroute to 66.179.175.2 (66.179.175.2), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
 1  * * *
 2  202.56.215.230  38.221 ms  41.175 ms  43.159 ms
 3  122.160.220.154  45.114 ms  47.115 ms  49.081 ms
 4  203.101.83.197  51.073 ms *  53.020 ms
 5  125.21.167.25  111.045 ms  112.970 ms  115.947 ms
 6  208.192.179.97  350.955 ms  321.876 ms  320.912 ms
 7  152.63.22.74  331.900 ms  331.915 ms  331.925 ms
 8  152.63.96.10  380.930 ms  380.894 ms  380.924 ms
 9  152.63.97.21  373.886 ms  375.914 ms  374.944 ms
10  157.130.155.154  375.842 ms  376.888 ms  384.888 ms
11  66.179.168.11  366.902 ms  366.932 ms  366.901 ms
12  66.179.80.100  362.945 ms  362.918 ms  363.908 ms
13  66.179.175.2  376.909 ms  381.914 ms  380.902 ms
14  66.179.175.2  375.000 ms  374.957 ms  373.920 ms
- -- end dump --

Thanks in advance.
- -- 
Ashish Shukla "Wah Java !!"
आशीष शुक्ल

weblog: http://wahjava.wordpress.com/

  ,= ,-_-. =.  | The  desire  to  be  rewarded  for one's  creativity  does |
 ((_/)o o(\_)) | not  justify depriving  the world  in  general of  all  or |
  `-'(. .)`-'  | part  of that  creativity.                                 |
      \_/      |                            - Richard M. Stallman           |

We've so many people in India, that we're able to route each network packet
manually.
             - nobotz to wahjava

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Freed.in | Freedom in technology & software | http://freed.in/register
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFG9tT3Hy+EEHYuXnQRAk1EAKCE6INixke3TjjaB1gnE7UHFeb6hACgpNjc
oCoiqr1rl4MJ5uO8m+R5/TQ=
=pM3y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Next Event: http://freed.in - September 28-29, 2007
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

Reply via email to