tracert question! win7

[#1]

Hoping you techies can help me out there.
When i did a 'tracert' to say bbc.co.uk. on my now old XP setup it would run in a flash.
All hops were under 30ms and name resolution was instant including the ip of the router.
But now i'v upgraded to win7 the hops are still under 30 but the name resolution and particularly the ip of the router are very slow.( sometimes 10 seconds per address)
Nothing has changed on the router side of things and i have disabled the ipv6 setting on the wirless card.
Is this normal ? if not whats the fix ?
Thanks

[#2]

mine takes between 3 and 5 secs for that bit on Windows 7 64 bit

[#3]

I forget teh exact details but it could be that M$ have switched over to the method of traceroute favored by *nix, I cannot comment on why *nix and Windows had been using different methods, but if you Google it there are some articles about it (which I read sometime ago), but what I do no is that the *nix method tends to be slower than the then Windows method (although *nix versions of traceroute support a switch which allows them to use the same method as Windows).

[#4]

The main Unix/Windows difference in traceroute operation is that the former uses UDP by default whereas the latter uses ICMP. This should not have any impact on the speed of the test.
To the OP, try using the -d option to disable DNS lookups to see if that narrows the slowness down...
Pinpointing the cause could be difficult unless you're able/willing to sniff the packets on the wire using something like Wireshark - we would then be able to obtain a better insight into where the delays are occurring.
All said and done is it causing a problem or is it more a question of curiosity?
Mathew

[#5]

Quote from: bigben

particularly the ip of the router are very slow.( sometimes 10 seconds per address)

Add an entry to your hosts file to point to your router and it will be instant. The file is C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts (edit it with notepad). I have the following entry in mine:

192.168.0.1	dg834

[#6]

Can I express some ignorance?

Quote

jeremy@HECTOR:~$ traceroute www.bbc.co.uk traceroute to www.bbc.co.uk (212.58.244.69), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1  ROUTER (192.168.1.1)  1.721 ms  2.285 ms  2.563 ms 2  lo0-central3.pcl-ag03.plus.net (195.166.128.240)  29.629 ms  30.699 ms  32.550 ms 3  gi1-7-331.pcl-gw01.plus.net (84.92.6.80)  33.103 ms  33.726 ms  34.021 ms 4  212.159.1.129 (212.159.1.129)  35.093 ms  36.928 ms  42.363 ms 5  te2-2.thn-gw2.plus.net (212.159.0.190)  42.535 ms  42.803 ms  43.017 ms 6  rt0.thdo.bbc.co.uk (212.58.239.25)  43.286 ms  41.965 ms  43.161 ms 7  212.58.238.133 (212.58.238.133)  43.847 ms  27.085 ms  26.852 ms 8  212.58.239.58 (212.58.239.58)  28.542 ms  29.688 ms  30.693 ms 9  212.58.251.44 (212.58.251.44)  32.605 ms  31.033 ms  43.707 ms 10  bbc-vip114.telhc.bbc.co.uk (212.58.244.69)  54.136 ms  68.289 ms  83.927 ms

Note:-
a) My router is listed in my hosts file, so it gets a name
b) I'm using dnsmasq, so DNS responses get cached in memory - no significant delays were seen for DNS lookups.
c) I'm using the "unix" traceroute method (apparently)
My question is what do the numbers mean?
For example:- the least time to reach host 2 (Plusnet) was 29ms, but the least time to reach host 8 was only 28ms.
What does it all mean?

[#7]

It's effectively the time it took to send a message to the listed device and for it to reply.
Most of the devices listed are routers of some sort, and whilst they reply to messages, their primary job is passing traffic around, it is quite possible that traffic passing through them is dealt with at a higher priority level than replying to messages is given.  Hence it is possible that it takes longer for a device to reply than it does to pass the exact same message on to a device further along.
Secondly, the amount of traffic (bandwidth in use) can vary moment to moment so any one reading is not that useful, it just tells you about that moment, not what you can normally expect.

[#8]

This LINK might be helpful too (in particular point 7)?