From: John Galt (everbeeninlove@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Feb 24 2005 - 21:23:10 EST
I am not sure about this, but as far as i know, record route is not a
mandatory directive according to standards, and routers are free to
ignore it.
Talking about traceroute, it works by incrementing the ttl by one each
time, so that each packet travels one hop further before being dropped
and an ICMP message coming back to the sender, right? However, IP
itself is designed so that each route is decided when the packet is
transmitted, not like in a VC. Thus, does a traceroute like that make
much of a sense? Since you never know what route your other packets,
or even all packets involved in the trace, took?
pray forgive my foolishness everybody!
regards
John Galt
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:49:03 +0100, Chris <uid0@free.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just got a little question which isn't really linked to
> pen-testing: do you know any alternative to the normal UDP/TCP/ICMP
> traceroute to trace the route of a packet? I'm already aware of the IP
> Record Route option, but is there any other hack that you guys would be
> aware of?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Christian Vincenot
>
> --
> "Portability is for people who cannot write new programs"
> -me [Linus Torvalds], right now (with tongue in cheek)
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat Apr 12 2008 - 10:54:17 EDT