skip to main content
10.1145/1452520.1452557acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Traceroute probe method and forward IP path inference

Published: 20 October 2008 Publication History

Abstract

Several traceroute probe methods exist, each designed to perform better in a scenario where another fails. This paper examines the effects that the choice of probe method has on the inferred forward IP path by comparing the paths inferred with UDP, ICMP, and TCP-based traceroute methods to (1) a list of routable IP addresses, (2) a list of known routers, and (3) a list of well-known websites. We further compare methods by examining seven months of macroscopic Internet topology data collected by CAIDA's Archipelago infrastructure.
We found significant differences in the topology observed using different probe methods. In particular, we found that ICMP-based traceroute methods tend to successfully reach more destinations, as well as collect evidence of a greater number of AS links. UDP-based methods infer the greatest number of IP links, despite reaching the fewest destinations. We hypothesise that some per-flow load balancers implement different forwarding policies for TCP and UDP, and run a specific experiment to confirm this hypothesis.

References

[1]
Van Jacobson. traceroute. ftp://ftp.ee.lbl.gov/traceroute.tar.gz.
[2]
Ehud Gavron. NANOG traceroute. http://momo.lcs.mit.edu/traceroute/traceroute.c.
[3]
J. Mogul and S. Deering. Path MTU discovery. RFC 1191, November 1990.
[4]
Michael Toren. tcptraceroute. http://michael.toren.net/code/tcptraceroute/.
[5]
Dan Kaminsky. paratrace. http://www.doxpara.com/read.php/docs/paratrace.html.
[6]
Brice Augustin, Xavier Cuvellier, Benjamin Orgogozo, Fabien Viger, Timur Friedman, Matthieu Latapy, Clémence Magnien, and Renata Teixeira. Avoiding traceroute anomalies with Paris traceroute. In IMC '06: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement, pages 153--158, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, October 2006.
[7]
Alexa. http://www.alexa.com/.
[8]
R-fx Networks. Advanced policy firewall (APF). http://www.r-fx.ca/downloads/apf-0.9.6-3.tar.gz.
[9]
Bradley Huffaker, Daniel Plummer, David Moore, and k. claffy. Topology discovery by active probing. In 2002 Symposium on applications and the Internet (SAINT 2002), pages 90--96, Nara City, Japan, January 2002.
[10]
S. Savage. Sting: a TCP-based network measurement tool. In Proceedings of USITS '99: The 2nd USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems, pages 71--79, Boulder, CO, October 1999.
[11]
Rob Sherwood and Neil Spring. Touring the Internet in a TCP sidecar. In IMC '06: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement, pages 339--344, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, October 2006.
[12]
Matthew Luckie. {patch} sys/netinet/udp_usrreq.c modifies received udp checksum, May 2007. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=112471.
[13]
Matthew Luckie. scamper. http://www.wand.net.nz/scamper/.
[14]
P. Mockapetris. Domain names - implementation and specification. RFC 1035, November 1987.
[15]
Brice Augustin, Timur Friedman, and Renata Teixeira. Measuring load-balanced paths in the Internet. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement, pages 149--160, San Diego, California, USA, October 2007.
[16]
Routeviews shcip bgp snapshots. http://archive.routeviews.org/oix-route-views/.
[17]
Z. Morley Mao, Jennifer Rexford, Jia Wang, and Randy Katz. Towards an accurate AS-level traceroute tool. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, pages 365--378, Karlsruhe, Germany, September 2003.
[18]
Young Hyun. Archipelago measurement infrastructure. http://www.caida.org/projects/ark/.
[19]
Patrick Verkaik. rv2atoms-0.4. http://www.caida.org/funding/routing/atoms/download/rv2atoms-0.4/.
[20]
Team Cymru. Bogon bit notation list v4.0 25 JAN 2008. http://www.cymru.com/Documents/bogon-bn.html.
[21]
A. Medina, M. Allman, and S. Floyd. Measuring the evolution of transport protocols in the Internet. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 35(2):37--52, April 2005.
[22]
John Heidemann, Yuri Pradkin, Ramesh Govindan, Christos Papadopoulos, Genevive Bartlett, and Joseph Bannister. Census and survey of the visible Internet (extended). ISI-TR 2008-649, USC/Information Sciences Institute, February 2008.
[23]
J. Postel. Internet control message protocol. RFC 792, September 1981.
[24]
Ramesh Govindan and Hongsuda Tangmunarunkit. Heuristics for Internet map discovery. In INFOCOM 2000, pages 1371--1380, Tel-Aviv, Israel, Mar 2000.
[25]
Jean-Jacques Pansiot and Dominique Grad. On routes and multicast trees in the Internet. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review (CCR), 28(1), Jan 1998.
[26]
David Gelernter and Nicholas Carriero. Coordination languages and their significance. Commun. ACM, 35(2):97--107, 1992.
[27]
Sascha Ossowski and Ronaldo Menezes. On coordination and its significance to distributed and multi-agent systems. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 18(4):359--370, 2006.
[28]
David Gelernter. Generative communication in linda. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 7(1):80--112, 1985.
[29]
Nicholas Carriero and David Gelernter. How to write parallel programs: a first course. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1990.
[30]
CAIDA IPv4 routed /24 topology dataset. http://imdc.datcat.org/collection/1-0360-J.
[31]
Randy Bush, James Hiebert, Olaf Maennel, Matthew Roughan, and Steve Uhlig. Testing the reachability of (new) address space. In Sigcomm workshop on Internet network management, August 2007.
[32]
N. Spring, R. Mahajan, and D. Wetherall. Measuring ISP topologies with Rocketfuel. In Proceedings of ACM/SIGCOMM '02, pages 133--145, Pittsburgh, PA, August 2002.
[33]
Ethan Katz-Bassett, Harsha V. Madhyastha, John P. John, and Arvind Krishnamurthy. Studying black holes in the Internet with Hubble. In Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI), Apr 2008.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. Traceroute probe method and forward IP path inference

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      IMC '08: Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement
      October 2008
      352 pages
      ISBN:9781605583341
      DOI:10.1145/1452520
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 20 October 2008

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. macroscopic internet topology discovery
      2. traceroute

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Conference

      IMC08: Internet Measurement Conference
      October 20 - 22, 2008
      Vouliagmeni, Greece

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 277 of 1,083 submissions, 26%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)44
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
      Reflects downloads up to 27 Dec 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media