从 2 个不同网络跟踪路由到单个 IP(一个成功,另一个失败)

从 2 个不同网络跟踪路由到单个 IP(一个成功,另一个失败)

来自 2 个不同环境的 traceroute 给出了不同的结果。一个成功通过,另一个失败。我不相信那会是我们自己的交换机/路由器 - 否则我将无法从亚马逊进入

知道为什么吗?

好的:(来自亚马逊 EC2 实例,Linux)

[ec2-user@devops rxprep_php]$ traceroute hg.saritasa.com
traceroute to hg.saritasa.com (208.122.225.186), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  ec2-50-112-0-200.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com (50.112.0.200)  0.623 ms  0.790 ms  0.770 ms
 2  205.251.232.62 (205.251.232.62)  0.869 ms  0.851 ms  0.874 ms
 3  205.251.232.140 (205.251.232.140)  9.020 ms  8.990 ms  0.972 ms
 4  205.251.232.91 (205.251.232.91)  19.642 ms 205.251.232.89 (205.251.232.89)  19.945 ms  19.870 ms
 5  205.251.226.178 (205.251.226.178)  19.715 ms 205.251.226.224 (205.251.226.224)  19.531 ms 205.251.225.163 (205.251.225.163)  13.149 ms
 6  ae-14.r04.sttlwa01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.201.169)  13.835 ms ae-13.r04.sttlwa01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.201.165)  13.981 ms ae-8.r04.sttlwa01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (198.104.202.189)  20.264 ms
 7  ae-6.r20.sttlwa01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.5.42)  45.034 ms ae-7.r20.sttlwa01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.5.46)  51.497 ms  13.453 ms
 8  ae-5.r21.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.3.39)  43.423 ms  30.370 ms  37.342 ms
 9  ae-0.r20.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.2.96)  31.042 ms  36.866 ms  30.529 ms
10  ae-4.r21.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.6.10)  53.771 ms  52.657 ms  45.189 ms
11  ae-2.r05.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.5.86)  48.797 ms ae-4.r21.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.6.10)  52.063 ms  57.826 ms
12  10g.ntt.lax01.xfernet.net (198.172.90.2)  40.450 ms  47.377 ms ae-2.r05.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.5.86)  50.988 ms
13  pc4.ds1.lax01.xfernet.net (67.43.160.70)  39.603 ms 10g.ntt.lax01.xfernet.net (198.172.90.2)  42.272 ms pc4.ds1.lax01.xfernet.net (67.43.160.70)  39.431 ms
14  ge-50.ar8.lax01.xfernet.net (67.43.160.134)  41.007 ms  40.796 ms  40.983 ms
15  ge-50.ar8.lax01.xfernet.net (67.43.160.134)  42.412 ms 208.122.225.186 (208.122.225.186)  43.084 ms !X  47.612 ms !X
16  208.122.225.186 (208.122.225.186)  40.778 ms !X  40.278 ms !X  40.759 ms !X
[ec2-user@devops rxprep_php]$ 

坏的:(来自本地 mac,通过 cox.net)

traceroute 208.122.225.186
traceroute to 208.122.225.186 (208.122.225.186), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
 1  192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1)  150.454 ms  2.254 ms  1.176 ms
 2  10.71.96.1 (10.71.96.1)  9.066 ms  8.837 ms  7.916 ms
 3  ip68-4-11-190.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.11.190)  10.616 ms  10.308 ms  9.094 ms
 4  ip68-4-11-95.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.11.95)  13.825 ms
    ip68-4-11-231.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.11.231)  10.319 ms
    ip68-4-11-95.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.11.95)  10.127 ms
 5  ip68-4-11-230.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.11.230)  11.533 ms
    ip68-4-11-94.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.11.94)  8.890 ms
    ip68-4-11-230.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.11.230)  11.588 ms
 6  langbprj02-ae2.rd.la.cox.net (68.1.1.19)  14.186 ms  11.401 ms  11.799 ms
 7  ethernet11-1.csr1.lax2.gblx.net (159.63.23.21)  14.444 ms  14.192 ms  11.811 ms
 8  ae12-90g.scr4.lax1.gblx.net (67.17.75.17)  11.888 ms
    ae14-90g.scr3.lax1.gblx.net (67.16.162.21)  12.878 ms
    ae12-90g.scr4.lax1.gblx.net (67.17.75.17)  12.678 ms
 9  e5-1-40g.ar6.lax1.gblx.net (67.17.111.65)  11.779 ms *  137.418 ms
10  10g.glbx.lax01.xfernet.net (64.208.170.38)  11.817 ms  12.781 ms *
11  pc4.ds1.lax01.xfernet.net (67.43.160.70)  120.354 ms  11.536 ms  12.486 ms
12  ge-50.ar8.lax01.xfernet.net (67.43.160.134)  14.364 ms *  15.378 ms
13  * * *
14  * * *
15  * * *
16  * * *
17  * * *
18  * * *
19  * * *
20  * * *
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * po2.ar4.lax1.gblx.net (67.16.132.214)  15.285 ms
30  * * *
31  * po2.ar4.lax1.gblx.net (67.16.132.214)  20.602 ms *
32  * * *
33  * * *
34  * * *
35  * * *
36  * * *
37  * * *
38  * * *
39  * * po2.ar4.lax1.gblx.net (67.16.132.214)  15.628 ms
40  * * *
41  * * *
42  * * *
43  * * *
44  * * *
45  * * *
46  * * *
47  * * *
48  * * *
49  * * *
50  * * *
51  * * *
52  * * *
53  * * *
54  * * *
55  * * *
56  * * *
57  * * *
58  * * *
59  * * *
60  * * *
61  * * *
62  * * *
63  * * *
64  * * *

答案1

事实上这两条跟踪路由都失败了(尽管方式不同)

首先,第一个跟踪没有成功完成。它只是告诉你,一些明智的管理员决定阻止与主机的通信(!X意思是“行政上禁止的通信”)。

第二条跟踪似乎不能告诉您一个明确的答案,这通常表明某些聪明的管理员决定在某个时候放弃 ICMP。

从这两条跟踪记录来看,我认为在您尝试到达目标时至少有 2 条不对称的延伸。众所周知,根据您来自哪里,您很容易以某种特定方式被路由。虽然看到跟踪路由中的差异有点令人不安,但这并不出乎意料(尤其是因为第一个跟踪路由最终表明有人积极拒绝提供连接)。

相关内容