seems like clickbait
traceroute uses udp to a high-port for discovery, not icmp-echo.
traceroute uses udp to a high-port for discovery, not icmp-echo.
Even the network diagram at the beginning is not very good. Can you create network architectures where 10.0.0.1 and 10.0.0.2 are not layer 2 adjacent? Yes, but they’re fairly complex and would imply that a lot of other necessary information is missing from the diagram. And should you use such an architecture as an example to explain traceroute? Absolutely not. It’s hard to imagine someone with even a CCNA level understanding of networking coming up with this.
I do agree that its bad but not for the same reason. On the diagram it looks like router IPs are their loopback IPs rather than the link IP, as we know a traceroute response comes from the interface the packet came in and that IP is used in the response. Seems like the creator tried to simplify the diagram and excluded linknets but made it more confusing instead.
Wackiest network I've seen in a while, and I've seen some real winners.
Source: https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/topic/how-to-use-tracert...
> The TRACERT diagnostic utility determines the route to a destination by sending Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) echo packets to the destination
anyways, the type of packet does not really matter.
my apologies if this misconstrued my point about the lacking quality of the article.
Heres why: Lots of calls from people complaining their application is not working because the network is broken. Look! at! this! traceroute! supporting! my! complaint!!!
Yeah, it is because udp from any to any is blocked on the firewall for good reasons while icmp traceroute is open. And be carefull because -I specifies the outgoint interface on some os, not the use of ICMP.