This task seemed quite straightforward to being with. Use internet tools to trace the route from the internet tool IP address to the IP address of choice. This allows the user to discover any issues with the connection and to see at which point data transfer is failing (if it is).op | rtt | rtt | rtt | | ip address | domain name |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 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 | | 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 | 15 | 8 | 8 | | 129.250.3.130 | as-0.r20.hstntx01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
8 | 8 | 8 | 7 | | 129.250.3.25 | ae-0.r21.hstntx01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
9 | 49 | 50 | 49 | | 129.250.3.121 | as-1.r21.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
10 | 49 | 49 | 50 | | 129.250.5.90 | xe-0-1-0.r03.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net |
11 | 50 | 50 | 50 | | 198.172.90.102 | p4-1-1-0.r03.lsanca03.us.ce.gin.ntt.net |
12 | 200 | 195 | 201 | | 202.158.194.153 | so-3-2-0.bb1.b.syd.aarnet.net.au |
13 | 211 | 213 | 212 | | 202.158.194.33 | so-2-0-0.bb1.a.mel.aarnet.net.au |
14 | 220 | 220 | 217 | | 202.158.194.17 | so-2-0-0.bb1.a.adl.aarnet.net.au |
15 | 249 | 249 | 244 | | 202.158.194.5 | so-0-1-0.bb1.a.per.aarnet.net.au |
16 | 249 | 247 | 247 | | 202.158.198.178 | gigabitethernet0.er1.curtin.cpe.aarnet.net.au |
17 | 244 | 244 | 249 | | 202.158.198.186 | gw1.er1.curtin.cpe.aarnet.net.au |
18 | 244 | 249 | 244 | | 134.7.16.46 |
|
19 | 247 | 249 | 249 | | 134.7.248.65 | te1-1.b309-sr.net.curtin.edu.au |
20 | 247 | 252 | 250 | | 134.7.179.53 |
Where the results of my trace route - indicating the IP address of the curtin.edu.au machine to be 134.7.179.53The average times were0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 7, 49, 50, 50, 201, 212, 217, 244, 247, 249, 244, 249, 250and there were 19 hops from the tools site to the Curtin server.In spite of reading howstuffworks.com, I struggled with how to interpret the data. I understood the first column to be the number of hops but was unsure about the next three columns. I finally took the first two of these columns to be the there and back route, the third column to be the avg of these first two figures (rounded up).Further exploration
Ping the webct site and compare the time with the time taken to ping from the net tools site. Is it less or more than you expected?
Pinging the webct site from network-tools.com took on avg (over 10 pings) 248.2 ms
Pinging from a-Toolbar running off my computer took on avg (over 10 pings) 66ms
This was much faster than I expected. I had assumed that it would be faster from my computer (as it is based in Australia and network-tools.com server would be in the US) but wasn't expecting such a massive difference.
Traceroute from your computer to curtin.edu.au: compare the number of hops with the earlier traceroute. What sort of differences can you observe?Number of hops = 15 to get to the final IP address as my earlier experiment from a web based site. Avg 4ms so again much faster.
I also found the data much easier to understand and interpret as it was laid out in a more orderly fashion.
I assume the speed difference is due to running from a machine based in Australia and tracing or pinging to another machine in the Australia. I also hazard a guess that using web based tools slow down the process compared to locally installed software.
No comments:
Post a Comment