Why ping -r 9 shows the correct path, but traceroute shows the incorrect address?? This address is the first address of that router! Why the heck tracert just don’t behave like ping -r 9??? Please, help.
C:\Documents and Settings\Ozelo>ping -r 9 187.8.171.225
Disparando contra 187.8.171.225 com 32 bytes de dados:
Resposta de 187.8.171.225: bytes=32 tempo=2ms TTL=61
Rota: 200.206.126.3 →
187.51.173.129 → (correct addresses of this route)
200.168.250.241 →
187.8.171.225 →
187.8.171.225 →
187.51.173.130 → (correct addresses of this route)
200.206.126.1 →
192.168.5.254Estatísticas do Ping para 187.8.171.225:
Pacotes: Enviados = 1, Recebidos = 1, Perdidos = 0 (0% de perda),
Aproximar um número redondo de vezes em milissegundos:
Mínimo = 2ms, Máximo = 2ms, Média = 2ms
Control-C
^C
C:\Documents and Settings\Ozelo>tracert -d 187.8.171.225Rastreando a rota para 187.8.171.225 com no máximo 30 saltos
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.5.254
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 200.206.126.1
3 <1 ms 1 ms <1 ms 187.92.90.98 (incorrect address of this route)
4 4 ms 2 ms 4 ms 187.8.171.225Rastreamento concluído.
C:\Documents and Settings\Ozelo>
edit
I just want to implement MPLS over a production OSPF network, replacing those public IPs for private ones. But when tracerouting I wont see private addresses, but just those public ones on VPLS endpoints. i.e. That 90.98 will be a private one, damn. Can’t understand whats going on!
edit
edit2
Ive found that “A single router should respond, using the IP address of the interface it transmits the ICMP Timeout messages on, which should be the same as the interface it received the original packets on.”, so that 90.98 address is the address of the “physical” interface it received the packet on, but the packet come from a VPLS that goes through that physical interface. Should it NOT respond with the address on the VPLS interface???
edit2