Just a couple other things to chew on......
There are two varieties of Trace. Cisco and Unix traces send to a large UDP
port. The goal is that the final destination send an ICMP Destination
Unreachable/Port Unreachable. This is in addition to the fact that the
intermediate hops decrement the TTL and send back an ICMP Time Exceeded/TTL
Expired message. It's a known problem with this method that end stations
don't always return the Destination Unreachable/Port Unreachable message so
Cisco traces just keep trying and trying.
Microsoft Trace and many other tools just send ICMP echoes (pings), in
addition to using the TTL business. This method has the advantage that end
stations tend to really respond to pings. But the ping response could be
filtered!?!
Does 10.1.2.3 do routing? Perhaps it sent the TTL Expired, but not the
final response, or maybe the final response got filtered.
What too were you using to do this trace, by the way? That would help us
understand the issue.
HTH
Priscilla
> >
> >""Watson, Rick, CTR, OUSDC"" All,
> >>
> >> When performing a trace on an IP address (for "testing purposes we'll
use
> >> 10.1.2.3) this is the result I get:
> >>
> >> router#trace 10.1.2.3
> >>
> >> Type escape sequence to abort.
> >> Tracing the route to 10.1.2.3
> >>
> >> 1 192.1.2.2 4 msec
> >> 192.1.2.10 4 msec
> >> 192.1.2.2 4 msec
> >> 2 10.1.2.3 0 msec 4 msec 4 msec
> >> 3 * * *
> >> 4 * * *
> >> 5 * * *
> >> 6 * * *
> >>
> >> This to me shows that I am still trying to find a path to the IP
> >> address...but if the IP Address is returned at the 2nd hop, why is the
> >trace
> >> still continuing? I thought that it would stop when the trace has the
> >> "path". Also note that when a "ping" is performed it returns the
infamous
> >> "....."
> >>
> >> This has really got me perplexed, and any help would be greatly
> >appreciated.
> >> Maybe I am just not understanding something about the trace
command/ICMP.
> >>
> >> Rick Watson
> >> Network Engineer
> >> Advanced Systems Development, Inc.
> >> OUSD(Comptroller)
> >> 703.697.5710 office
> >> 800.309.7782 pager ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> >> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>****************************************************************************
>***********************************
>Darren S. Crawford
>Lucent Technologies Worldwide Services
>2377 Gold Meadow Way Phone: (916) 859-5200 x310
>Suite 230 Fax: (916) 859-5201
>Sacramento, CA 95670 Pager: (800) 467-1467
>Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Epager: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.lucent.com Network Systems
>Consultant - CCNA, CCIE Written
>
> "Providing the Power Operable Networks."
>
>****************************************************************************
>***********************************
> "Ham and Eggs - A day's work for a chicken; A lifetime commitment
>for a
>pig."
>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________
Priscilla Oppenheimer
http://www.priscilla.com
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=5352&t=5259
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
