Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The following is what happens when I run traceroute from a certain location:

# traceroute google.com
traceroute to google.com (74.125.227.39), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1)  0.138 ms  0.101 ms  0.084 ms
 2  * * *
 3  * * *
 4  * * *
 5  * * *
 6  * * *
 7  * * *
 8  * * *
 9  * * *
10  * * *
11  * * *
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  * * *
15  * * *
16  * * *
17  * * *
18  * * *
19  * * *
20  * * *
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * *
30  * * *

Absolutely nothing of interest...

Now, originally I thought this was just a fact of the location's network set up. (I assume they block pings or something...)

However, watch what happens when I use nmap to run a traceroute...

# nmap -sP --traceroute google.com

Starting Nmap 5.21 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2012-09-25 22:18 CDT
Nmap scan report for google.com (74.125.227.40)
Host is up (0.034s latency).
Hostname google.com resolves to 11 IPs. Only scanned 74.125.227.40
rDNS record for 74.125.227.40: dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net

TRACEROUTE (using proto 1/icmp)
HOP RTT      ADDRESS
1   0.19 ms  gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1)
2   1.93 ms  99-20-92-1.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.1)
3   25.61 ms 99-20-92-2.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.2)
4   ... 6
7   23.68 ms 12.83.68.137
8   31.30 ms gar23.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.85.73)
9   ...
10  31.82 ms 72.14.233.65
11  32.27 ms 209.85.250.77
12  32.98 ms dfw06s06-in-f8.1e100.net (74.125.227.40)

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 3.29 seconds

When using nmap I get A LOT more results than with traceroute, why?

Note, I checked, and the difference in target IP addresses is not related...

Edit:

$ sudo traceroute -I google.com
[sudo] password for XXX: 
traceroute to google.com (74.125.227.14), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  gateway.local.enactpc.com (10.0.0.1)  0.151 ms  0.132 ms  0.121 ms
 2  * * *
 3  99-20-92-2.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net (99.20.92.2)  27.277 ms  27.661 ms  27.666 ms
 4  * * *
 5  * * *
 6  * * *
 7  12.83.68.137 (12.83.68.137)  28.446 ms  24.024 ms  24.689 ms
 8  gar23.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.85.73)  62.576 ms  61.079 ms  38.973 ms
 9  * * *
10  72.14.233.65 (72.14.233.65)  32.226 ms  31.343 ms  100.206 ms
11  216.239.47.54 (216.239.47.54)  33.117 ms  31.809 ms  32.469 ms
12  dfw06s03-in-f14.1e100.net (74.125.227.14)  32.307 ms  31.807 ms  32.554 ms
share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 3 down vote accepted

I would guess that it's because traceroute is using UDP by default, whereas nmap is perhaps using plain ICMP (like tracert in Windows). Try quanta's suggestion but use the -I switch instead, i.e.

sudo traceroute -I google.com
share|improve this answer
    
That's probably it! I just noticed that nmap even says (using proto 1/icmp). If you look at the edit however, you'll notice that hop #2 does not show for some reason!? Why does hop #2 show for nmap, but not for traceroute -I? –  Soviero Sep 27 '12 at 21:20

Try this:

sudo traceroute -T google.com
share|improve this answer
    
Same, but the last hop now shows, still not as detailed as nmap though... –  Soviero Sep 26 '12 at 3:38

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.