<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: Proposal for two minor improvements in prtraceroute

  • To: (Tony Bates)
  • From: "Peder Chr. Norgaard" < >
  • Date: Fri, 7 Jan 1994 11:00:41 +0100 (CET)

>   *
> Well it does in my version ????
> traceroute with AS and policy additions [Jan  6 15:08:55 UTC] 
> 
>                 from AS1104 ns.ripe.net (192.87.45.1)
>                 to   AS1128 Amsterdam1.dante.net (193.172.12.30)
> 
>  1 AS1104  hef-router.nikhef.nl           (192.87.45.80)     [I]
>  2 AS1103  Amsterdam1.router.surfnet.nl   (192.16.183.112)   [D1]
>  3 AS1103  Amsterdam2.router.surfnet.nl   (145.41.9.130)     [I]
>  4 AS2043  amsterdam4.empb.net            (193.172.4.17)     [ERROR]
>  5 AS2043  amsterdam5.empb.net            (193.172.4.19)     [I]
>  6 AS1128  Amsterdam1.dante.net           (193.172.12.30)    [?]
> 
> AS Path followed:  1104 1103 2043 1128
> 
> AS1104 = NIKHEF-H
> AS1103 = SURFnet IP
> AS2043 = European Multiprotocol Backbone
> AS1128 = DANTE Gateway in Amsterdam
> 
> So this is a mystery - can you mail to pride-tools@localhost a copy of
> your prtraceroute ?
> Also, just in case there was some confusion I have remade the 1.0.1
> distribution which may mean you get a newer prtraceroute as well.

That is certainly a mystery - I will send you my copy in a separate letter.  I
picked it up from ftp.ripe.net as the 1.0.1 version yesterday, so it should be
pretty recent.  A possible difference between our systems could be the quality
of the underlying perl interpreter, using C library gethostby* calls; however,
I have just used the perl debugger to verify that my perl interpreter works
proper on this point.

By the way, why does your run show ERROR in line 4 and question mark in line 6?
As far as I can see, the route is legal according to the specified policies
of all four ASs.

> Well not really - the address is chosen implicitly by the user (i.e
> the IP address typed in or slected by DNS as you typed a hostname and
> that IP address being traced to will always be shown).
> 

Yes, I know that the IP address being traced will be shown; my proposal was
meant to counter the natural error for a human reader to commit when reading

                to   AS1128 Amsterdam1.dante.net (193.172.12.30)

namely to focus on the most readable part, the DNS name, and use that
when (for instance) trying to reproduce a run.  That is why I suggested
that you used a graphically different output format in the case where
an operator explicitly specifies an IP address.

But this is no big deal; if you prefer your current solution, you stick to
that.

Greetings -
				--peder chr.



  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>