What is Traceroute?

Traceroute is a network diagnostic tool used to display the route (path) and measure transit delays of packets across an Internet Protocol (IP) network. It identifies every router, or ‘hop’, a packet passes through on its way from a source computer to a destination.

When you connect to a website, your request does not travel through a single, direct wire. It journeys through a complex web of interconnected networks, passed from one router to another until it reaches its final destination.

Traceroute provides a map of that journey. It shows you each stop along the way and tells you how long it took to get from one stop to the next. This makes it an essential tool for understanding and troubleshooting network performance.

The original traceroute program was written by Van Jacobson in 1987. Its purpose was to give network administrators visibility into how their data was actually traveling across the internet, which was largely a black box at the time.

Today, its significance has only grown. For system administrators, DevOps engineers, and even curious power users, traceroute is the first step in diagnosing why a website is slow or a service is unreachable. It helps pinpoint whether a problem is local, with the ISP, or deep within the internet’s backbone.

Different operating systems have their own versions of the tool. Unix-like systems (including Linux and macOS) use `traceroute`, which traditionally uses UDP packets. Windows uses a slightly different utility named `tracert`, which sends ICMP Echo Request packets by default.

How Traceroute Works: The Technical Mechanics

The genius of traceroute lies in its clever manipulation of a standard IP header field called the Time-To-Live (TTL). The TTL is not a measure of time; it is a counter that limits the lifespan of a data packet.

Think of TTL as a maximum hop count. When a packet is created, it is given a starting TTL value. Every time a router forwards that packet, it decrements the TTL value by one.

This mechanism is a safeguard. It prevents packets that are stuck in a routing loop from circling the internet forever and causing network congestion. Without TTL, a misconfigured router could create a digital traffic jam.

If a router receives a packet and decrements its TTL to zero, it is designed to do two things. First, it discards the packet. Second, it sends an error message, called an ICMP ‘Time Exceeded’ message, back to the original sender.

This ‘Time Exceeded’ message is the key signal that traceroute listens for. The message contains the IP address of the router that sent it. This is how traceroute discovers the identity of each hop along the path.

The process begins by sending out a probe packet toward the destination, but with a TTL value set to 1. The very first router on the path receives it, decrements the TTL to 0, discards the packet, and sends back the ‘Time Exceeded’ message.

Traceroute receives this message, records the router’s IP address as the first hop, and measures the round-trip time (RTT) for the exchange. It now knows the first step of the journey.

Next, it sends a second probe packet, but this time with a TTL value of 2. The first router decrements the TTL to 1 and forwards it. The second router receives it, decrements the TTL to 0, and sends back its own ‘Time Exceeded’ message.

Traceroute now has the identity and RTT for the second hop. This process repeats, incrementing the TTL by one for each new set of probes. It builds a map of the network path, one hop at a time, until the packet finally reaches its destination.

When the probe packet reaches the final destination server, one of two things happens. If using UDP probes (common on Linux/macOS), the packet tries to access an invalid port number. The server’s operating system responds with an ICMP ‘Port Unreachable’ message, which tells traceroute it has arrived.

If using ICMP probes (the `tracert` default on Windows), the destination server simply sends back an ‘Echo Reply’. This also signals the successful end of the trace. By recording each step, traceroute paints a complete picture of the path and its performance.

Interpreting the Output

A standard traceroute output displays several columns of information. The first column is the hop number. The next shows the hostname or IP address of the router at that hop.

The final columns typically show three separate round-trip time measurements. Sending three probes per hop provides a better sense of latency consistency and jitter. A wide variation in these three numbers can indicate an unstable link.

Occasionally, you will see an asterisk (`*`) instead of a time measurement. This indicates a ‘Request Timed Out’. It means no reply was received from that router within the expected timeframe. This can be due to network congestion or, more commonly, a firewall or router configured to ignore traceroute’s probes.

Traceroute in Action: Three Case Studies

Understanding the theory is one thing, but seeing how traceroute solves real-world business problems shows its true value. It moves from being a simple command to a critical diagnostic asset.

Case Study A: The Slow E-commerce Checkout

The Problem: An online retailer noticed a significant drop in sales. Analytics revealed a high cart abandonment rate specifically on the final payment confirmation page. Their own servers showed normal load and response times, leaving the team confused.

The Diagnosis: A network engineer suspected the issue might not be with their website, but with the connection to their third-party payment processor. They used an external monitoring service to run a traceroute from a server in a major city to the payment processor’s API endpoint.

The Findings: The traceroute results were revealing. The first 10 hops within their hosting provider’s network were fast, under 20ms. But at hop 11, the latency suddenly jumped to over 250ms. This hop represented the point where their provider’s network handed off traffic to a major internet backbone provider. The subsequent hops to the payment gateway all maintained this high latency.

The Solution: Armed with the traceroute data as concrete evidence, they contacted their hosting provider. They showed that traffic was taking a highly inefficient, cross-country route to reach a payment processor located in the same state. The provider investigated and confirmed a BGP routing misconfiguration. They adjusted their routing policy, and within an hour, the path was direct. Latency dropped to 40ms, the checkout page became fast again, and conversion rates returned to normal.

Case Study B: The Unreliable B2B Lead Form

The Problem: A B2B software company’s ‘Request a Demo’ form was failing for some European users. The form submitted data to their CRM’s API. The failures were intermittent, making them difficult to reproduce. The CRM provider insisted their API was fully operational.

The Diagnosis: The development team set up a script on a virtual private server (VPS) in Frankfurt, Germany. The script ran a traceroute to the CRM’s API endpoint every five minutes and logged the results. They let this run for a full day to capture data during periods of failure.

The Findings: The logs showed a clear pattern. During successful submissions, the route was stable and fast. During failures, the traceroute showed a completely different path with several hops timing out. This pointed to a classic case of asymmetrical routing. The path from Europe *to* the CRM was fine, but the CRM’s response packets were being sent back via a different, congested network path that was experiencing packet loss.

The Solution: They could not force the CRM provider to fix their outbound routing. Instead, they implemented a workaround. They configured a small proxy server in a US data center that had a stable, reliable connection to the CRM. The European web servers now sent API requests to this proxy, which then forwarded them to the CRM over the stable path. This completely bypassed the problematic return route and solved the intermittent failures.

Case Study C: The Ad Revenue-Leaking Publisher

The Problem: A major online news publisher saw a steady decline in programmatic ad revenue, despite stable traffic. Their ad operations team noted that ad viewability scores, a key metric for revenue, were dropping. They suspected ads were loading too slowly for many users.

The Diagnosis: The publisher’s ads were served by a global Content Delivery Network (CDN), which is supposed to route users to the nearest server for fast delivery. They used a Real User Monitoring (RUM) solution to collect performance data, including traceroutes, directly from the browsers of their actual visitors.

The Findings: After analyzing traceroute data from thousands of user sessions, a pattern emerged. A large segment of their audience in Southeast Asia was experiencing extremely high ad latency. The traces showed these users were being routed to a CDN server in Los Angeles instead of the designated server in Singapore. This incorrect routing added over 200ms of network latency before the ad even began to load.

The Solution: The publisher presented their CDN provider with a detailed report, including dozens of traceroute examples from affected user IPs. The CDN provider investigated and found a misconfiguration in their GeoDNS system for that specific region. Once corrected, users were properly routed to the Singapore server. Ad load times for the region dropped by 80%, viewability scores rebounded, and ad revenue recovered within the next quarter.

The Financial Impact of Network Latency

The problems identified by traceroute are not just technical inconveniences; they have a direct and measurable financial cost. A few milliseconds of delay can translate into thousands or even millions of dollars in lost revenue.

For the e-commerce store in our case study, industry data suggests a 100ms delay can reduce conversion rates by as much as 7%. The 210ms of extra latency they experienced could have been costing them over 14% of their sales. On a site earning $5 million annually, fixing that routing issue could be worth $700,000 per year.

In the B2B lead generation scenario, every lost lead has a cost. If the company’s average deal size is $10,000 and they close 1 in 20 leads, each lead is worth $500. If the API issue caused them to lose just five leads per week, that amounts to a loss of $130,000 in potential annual revenue, all due to a bad return path.

The publisher’s ad revenue is directly tied to speed. Slow-loading ads get lower viewability scores, which makes advertisers bid less for that ad space in programmatic auctions. A 200ms improvement in ad load time can increase viewability and CPMs (cost per mille) by 5-10%. For a publisher with billions of ad impressions, that small percentage translates to a significant revenue recovery.

Traceroute, therefore, is not just a diagnostic tool. It is an instrument for financial optimization. By providing the evidence needed to fix underlying network issues, it helps protect and grow revenue streams that depend on speed and reliability.

Strategic Nuance: Advanced Traceroute Insights

While traceroute is a foundational tool, interpreting its results correctly requires a deeper understanding. Several common myths can lead to incorrect conclusions, while advanced techniques can reveal problems others might miss.

Myths vs. Reality

Myth: A line of asterisks (`* * *`) means a router is down and the network is broken at that point.
Reality: This is rarely the case. It usually means the router at that hop is configured for security not to respond to the type of packets traceroute sends. If the trace continues successfully on the next hop, it means the packet passed through just fine; the router simply chose not to reply.

Myth: A single hop shows very high latency, so that router must be the problem.
Reality: Not always. Some core network routers are designed to de-prioritize ICMP traffic in favor of forwarding actual user data. The high latency you see might only apply to the traceroute probe itself, not the real traffic. The key is to look for a sustained increase in latency. If hop 5 shows 150ms and every hop after it is also 150ms or higher, then the latency was likely introduced between hop 4 and 5.

Myth: The path shown by traceroute is the exact, stable path your application data takes.
Reality: The internet is dynamic. Routing protocols like BGP can change paths at any moment based on network conditions. Furthermore, traceroute only shows the forward path. The return path from the server back to you can be completely different, a condition known as asymmetrical routing, which traceroute alone cannot see.

Advanced Tips

Use MTR (My Traceroute): For more serious diagnostics, use a tool like MTR. It combines the functionality of traceroute and ping into a single, continuously updated display. It repeatedly sends packets to each hop, allowing you to see metrics like packet loss and latency jitter in real-time. This makes it far easier to spot unstable or congested links that a single traceroute might miss.

Trace from Both Directions: To diagnose asymmetrical routing, you need to see the path from both ends. If you have access to the destination server, run a traceroute from it back to your source IP. Comparing the forward and reverse traces can quickly reveal if your traffic is taking different routes in each direction, which is a common source of hard-to-diagnose problems.

Consider Layer 4 Traceroute: Standard traceroute uses UDP or ICMP. However, firewalls sometimes block these protocols while allowing TCP traffic (which is what most web applications use). Tools like `tcptraceroute` or `nmap` can send TCP SYN packets instead. This can sometimes bypass firewalls and give you a more accurate representation of the path your actual application traffic is taking.

Abisola

Meet Abisola! As the content manager at ClickPatrol, she’s the go-to expert on all things fake traffic. From bot clicks to ad fraud, Abisola knows how to spot, stop, and educate others about the sneaky tactics that inflate numbers but don’t bring real results.

View all posts by Abisola (Abisola)