For the final task of Module 1, I began by using the two suggested web sites in the Task outline. Firstly I went to centralops.net and used Traceroute to discover the following:
Tracing route to curtin.edu.au [134.7.179.53]…
|
hop |
rtt |
rtt |
rtt |
|
ip address |
domain name |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
70.84.211.97 |
61.d3.5446.static.theplanet.com |
|
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
70.84.160.162 |
vl2.dsr02.dllstx5.theplanet.com |
|
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
70.85.127.109 |
po52.dsr02.dllstx3.theplanet.com |
|
4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
70.87.253.21 |
et3-1.ibr03.dllstx3.theplanet.com |
|
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
157.238.225.5 |
xe-4-4.r03.dllstx09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
6 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
129.250.2.153 |
ae-2.r20.dllstx09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
7 |
6 |
6 |
47 |
|
129.250.3.130 |
as-0.r20.hstntx01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
8 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
|
129.250.3.25 |
ae-0.r21.hstntx01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
9 |
48 |
48 |
48 |
|
129.250.3.121 |
as-1.r21.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
10 |
48 |
47 |
48 |
|
129.250.5.90 |
xe-0-1-0.r03.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
11 |
48 |
48 |
48 |
|
198.172.90.102 |
p4-1-1-0.r03.lsanca03.us.ce.gin.ntt.net |
|
12 |
196 |
200 |
201 |
|
202.158.194.157 |
so-4-0-0.bb1.b.syd.aarnet.net.au |
|
13 |
213 |
212 |
208 |
|
202.158.194.33 |
so-2-0-0.bb1.a.mel.aarnet.net.au |
|
14 |
221 |
217 |
217 |
|
202.158.194.17 |
so-2-0-0.bb1.a.adl.aarnet.net.au |
|
15 |
250 |
248 |
248 |
|
202.158.194.5 |
so-0-1-0.bb1.a.per.aarnet.net.au |
|
16 |
265 |
252 |
471 |
|
202.158.198.178 |
gigabitethernet0.er1.curtin.cpe.aarnet.net.au |
|
17 |
245 |
245 |
248 |
|
202.158.198.186 |
gw1.er1.curtin.cpe.aarnet.net.au |
|
18 |
248 |
248 |
249 |
|
134.7.16.46 |
te2-4-b309-cr.net.curtin.edu.au |
|
19 |
245 |
245 |
245 |
|
134.7.248.65 |
te1-1.b309-sr.net.curtin.edu.au |
|
20 |
249 |
245 |
249 |
|
134.7.179.53 |
|
Trace complete
This told me there were 19 hops before reaching Curtin (20 in total), and that the average time for the trip was just under 2.4 seconds. It also showed the IP address of the hostname curtin.edu.au to be 134.7.179.53. I then went to the second suggested site, network-tools.com and did the same exercise again with the following results:
134.7.179.53 is from Australia(AU) in region Oceana
TraceRoute to 134.7.179.53 [curtin.edu.au]
|
Hop |
(ms) |
(ms) |
(ms) |
|
IP Address |
Host name |
|
1 |
14 |
9 |
8 |
|
72.249.0.65 |
- |
|
2 |
8 |
22 |
13 |
|
8.9.232.73 |
ge-6-18.car1.dallas1.level3.net |
|
3 |
14 |
17 |
7 |
|
4.68.19.204 |
ae-4-99.edge2.dallas3.level3.net |
|
4 |
20 |
208 |
45 |
|
4.68.63.226 |
ntt-level3-te.dallas3.level3.net |
|
5 |
Timed out |
19 |
18 |
|
129.250.2.153 |
ae-2.r20.dllstx09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
6 |
18 |
28 |
29 |
|
129.250.3.130 |
as-0.r20.hstntx01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
7 |
13 |
11 |
11 |
|
129.250.3.25 |
ae-0.r21.hstntx01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
8 |
59 |
67 |
68 |
|
129.250.3.121 |
as-1.r21.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
9 |
57 |
56 |
56 |
|
129.250.5.90 |
xe-0-1-0.r03.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
|
10 |
58 |
56 |
56 |
|
198.172.90.102 |
p4-1-1-0.r03.lsanca03.us.ce.gin.ntt.net |
|
11 |
214 |
214 |
209 |
|
202.158.194.77 |
so-3-1-0.bb1.b.syd.aarnet.net.au |
|
12 |
221 |
223 |
225 |
|
202.158.194.33 |
so-2-0-0.bb1.a.mel.aarnet.net.au |
|
13 |
234 |
234 |
235 |
|
202.158.194.17 |
so-2-0-0.bb1.a.adl.aarnet.net.au |
|
14 |
262 |
255 |
260 |
|
202.158.194.5 |
so-0-1-0.bb1.a.per.aarnet.net.au |
|
15 |
262 |
257 |
263 |
|
202.158.198.178 |
gigabitethernet0.er1.curtin.cpe.aarnet.net.au |
|
16 |
263 |
264 |
266 |
|
202.158.198.186 |
gw1.er1.curtin.cpe.aarnet.net.au |
|
17 |
262 |
259 |
260 |
|
134.7.16.46 |
te2-4-b309-cr.net.curtin.edu.au |
|
18 |
265 |
262 |
262 |
|
134.7.248.65 |
te1-1.b309-sr.net.curtin.edu.au |
|
19 |
265 |
260 |
262 |
|
134.7.179.53 |
- |
Trace complete
This time there were only 19 hops in total, yet the average time for the trip had increased to just over 2.6 seconds. They reported the same IP address for Curtin but also gave the added information that the address being traced is in Australia in the region of Oceana.
It was here that I realised a lot of this unit so far gave you the option of what I’ll term ‘Cut & Paste learning’. In this I mean if you go through the module and follow the suggestions given for the software, the pages etc you will be able to get the answers needed to complete the tasks, but are you really giving to the subject? Sure you’ll walk away with a passing grade but you won’t really have got the most that this unit offers, or necessarily have the skills or information to complete any of the set tasks in real life. Sure you’ll know that both centralops.net and network-tools.com allow you to Traceroute or ping a server, but what if those sites disappear? Without actively seeking out other sources of the same information, and trying different programs than those suggested in other tasks are we really taking in the information being taught? Have we truly learnt the subject matter? So I decided to have a surf and see how many other sites there were out there with the same tools, and pick one to redo the task. There were many more sites offering the same service than I thought there would be, and trying the exercise on a few of them found the time always varied but stayed between 2.3 – 2.6 seconds, and the amount of hops ranged from 16 to 20. I found it interesting that in all the tests, you could see how the time increased dramatically around halfway along the journey. After reading the concepts and the links to How Stuff Works (http://computer.howstuffworks.com/web-server3.htm) I surmised it to be at a point in the journey where the information had passed out of the local domain and through both the regional and world ISP’s, and had come to the traffic of the regional ISP of the Traceroute target’s domain.
I can see the value of Traceroute as an educational tool, but can also see the application of it in network maintenance and the future development of the internet. For network administrators it seems a great little tool to track where you may have network bottlenecks, even on company LAN’s. Because each hop gives the address of the router, you can see where on the network information is getting held up and then troubleshoot that particular router and the computers directly connected to it. On the benefits it could give to the development side of the internet, I believe it could spur on the search for better and faster routers, better performing or higher bandwidth cabling. Perhaps it might even go further and inspire someone to develop a totally new network protocol to transfer information at a faster and more stable rate. Because it shows the time that each hop takes, as well as the number of hops to a given destination, it could also be used by internet game developers and other business models to test the viability of new marketplaces.
For example you have developed a game to be played online, but it’s very graphics and music intensive and relies on quick decisions and reactions to play the game successfully. You’ve tested it on multiple network configurations and worked out that a PING of around 2 seconds is the most that is acceptable to play the game. Using Traceroute you could test how many hops and how much time it takes from your central game server to different domains around the world, finding out if your game could be played from there, or whether you need to set up another local server in that country to enhance game quality.
June 16, 2008 at 11:55 pm
It sounds like you’re just learning about this type of stuff and realizing how big the network is. Here’s a little more information for you to ponder.
There are some limitations to traceroute. Most notably, traceroute uses ICMP packets which are usually very low on the QoS (Quality of Service) scale. In other words, backbone providers typically decrease the priority of ping and traceroute because they really aren’t that critical. It’s good for a basic test, but isn’t really a good source of actual info. For congestion type of info, the only place you’ll get real data is from the router.
Second, when you traceroute, you’re only seeing your route to the destination. You don’t see the destination’s route back to you. Traffic on the internet is often not asymmetric meaning you could go through an entirely different set of routers (or even Internet providers) in either direction. This can put you on a wild goose chase if some link is broken on the return path because from your side, it appears that it’s the last router in the chain before it stops.
June 16, 2008 at 11:56 pm
(that should read routes are often not SYMMETRIC)
June 17, 2008 at 3:28 am
Was it that hard to tell I’ve just started the course, lol? Thanks for the extra info on the limitations, I can see now what should have been obvious from the start. Never thought about the priority of network packets with regards to ping and traceroute
, thanks again for pointing it out.
June 18, 2008 at 4:32 am
“It was here that I realised a lot of this unit so far gave you the option of what I’ll term ‘Cut & Paste learning’.”
I agree with this statement and am pleased you’re offering more than that, it makes for a good read and highlights things I hadn’t thought of myself. So, cheers for provoking thought, and thanks to Random Geek, too. I noticed that traceroute is meant for network troubleshooting and that it’s good to get a trace in both directions, although this is not always possible because plenty of systems block loose-sourced packets at their borders as a security measure these days.