On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday 22 January 2009 07:44, Mahavir Jain wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I found a strange behaviour within firewall blocking UDP ports or even >> ICMP echoes. >> >> $ traceroute -n www.yahoo.com >> >> traceroute to www.yahoo.com (209.131.36.158), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets >> 1 192.168.10.3 (192.168.10.3) 0.949 ms 1.084 ms 0.981 ms >> 2 192.168.10.1(192.168.10.1) 1.944 ms 2.301 ms 1.951 ms >> 3 * * * >> 4 * * * >> 5 * * * >> 6 * * * >> 7 * * * >> 8 * * * >> 9 * * * >> 10 * * * >> 11 * * * >> 12 * * * >> 13 * * * >> 14 * * * >> 15 * * * >> 16 * * * >> 17 * * * >> 18 * * * >> 19 * * * >> 20 * * * >> 21 * * * >> 22 * * * >> 23 * * * >> 24 * * * >> 25 * * * >> 26 * * * >> 27 * * * >> 28 * * * >> 29 * * * >> 30 * * * >> >> This entirely takes around 7-8 minutes, while standard linux command >> takes just 1-2 minutes. > > And what does standard linux command show? Does it succeed? > >> Beacuse of this much delay my application GUI >> just times out due to standard HTTP request. > > I just tried a "standard" traceroute and it also waits > 5 second for every probe. Thus, if you want your GUI > to work even if someone tries to traceroute 1.1.1.1, > you need to deal with it. Increase timeout in https server > and/or use -w option to reduce the wait, -m TTL > to reduce the depth and so on.
Yes, "standard" traceroute has default 5 seconds for probe, but still when i executed same above command as $ traceroute -n www.yahoo.com behind firewall , it exited in less 1.5 minutes. But same when i tried with busybox traceroute it needed around 8-9 minutes. I tried -w 2 & other options as well but no significant difference in worst case time. My problem is that this behaviour with busybox traceroute for multiple destinations i tried is not constant & repeateble from , amount of time needed to execute commamnd...? It makes difficult to design my application . > If, on the contrary, your problem is that bbox's traceroute > isn't tracing correctly, please try this updated version > (attached). > >> Even there is no option TCP based traceroute for bypassing firewall settings. > > Yep. Lazy me. > >> Even trying impossible host such as $ traceroute -n 1.1.1.1 > > I don't understand what are you trying to say here. > >> Any Workaround , I am using busybox 1.12.0 . > > The good thing would be to explain your problem better. > -- > vda > Mahavir _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
