Re: basic ping diff with windows ping
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 23:37:44 +0100, Adam Hardy wrote:
> Camaleón on 25/10/10 11:04, wrote:
>>> Seriously slightly quirky, but now it's better than windows again,
>>> which is the way it should be.
>>
>> The only thing it could make a difference between Windows "tracert" and
>> Linux "traceroute" is iptables but I 'm not sure about that (how can
>> iptables interfere with traceroute, by blocking/filtering packets? :-?)
>
> I didn't mean linux traceroute was quirky in execution - I just meant
> the options were not ideal for me. The dumbed-down version on windows
> was just right for my abilities and knowledge and what I wanted. But
> then if I hadn't used the windows traceroute first I might never have
> developed such preconceptions.
Well, Windows traceroute defaults to icmp while linux one seems to be
using udp which can be problematic with firewalls, so the windows
counterpart is a bit more "sensible" for today's routing diagnostics.
But true is that there is a slightly difference in the output we get from
a windows box traceroute and linux so besides the traceroute utility
itself there must be something in between which interferes/alters the
results.
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
Reply to: