Re: nmap-4.22SOC5 traceroute problem

["Kris Katterjohn" <katterjohn () gmail com>]

On 8/22/07, João Paulo de Souza Medeiros <ignotus21 () gmail com> wrote:
> Hi friends,
>
>     The problem is about a possible differences in XML output in Windows
> a Unix*. In some traces appear the hops with ipaddr="" and in some
> others this attr don't exists, like this:
>
> <trace port="21" proto="tcp">
> <hop rtt="--" ipaddr="192.168.254.254" ttl="1"/>
> <hop rtt="20.45" ipaddr=" 200.217.89.32" ttl="2"/>
> (...)
> <hop rtt="236.06" ipaddr="213.140.52.242" ttl="12"/>
> <hop rtt="" ipaddr="" ttl="13"/>
> <hop rtt="" ipaddr="" ttl="14"/>
> <hop rtt="256.70" ipaddr="149.20.65.114" ttl="15"/>
> <hop rtt="247.74 " ipaddr="149.20.65.114" ttl="16"/>
> <hop rtt="244.69" ipaddr="204.152.191.5" ttl="17"/>
> </trace>
>
>     But, this "problem" was fixed in UmitMapper parsing. Other questions
> is: the hops 15 and 16 are the same, this is a routing thing or a problem?
Wasn't there something like this in TCP/IP Illustrated, because of some
buggy systems that forward packets when TTL=0 ?

I swear, all of the interesting emails happen when I'm not at home, so I
don't have Linux or my books! :)

Thanks,
Kris Katterjohn

_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://SecLists.Org