kicker -
You traced to an IP that is not a server and will not allow a UDP trace. However there is more to the problem as the trace stopped in Dallas.
No IPs around 216.190.230.226 respond to pings from 216.40.244.1:
223.36#ping 216.190.230.226 source 216.40.244.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.226, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Request timed out.
No reply from remote host.
223.36#ping 216.190.230.225 source 216.40.244.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.225, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Request timed out.
No reply from remote host.
223.36#ping 216.190.230.227 source 216.40.244.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.227, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Request timed out.
No reply from remote host.
They also do not respond to pings from 216.40.245.1:
223.36#ping 216.190.230.227 source 216.40.245.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.227, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Request timed out.
No reply from remote host.
223.36#ping 216.190.230.226 source 216.40.245.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.226, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Request timed out.
No reply from remote host.
223.36#ping 216.190.230.225 source 216.40.245.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.225, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Request timed out.
No reply from remote host.
But other ranges of sources ping fine:
223.36#ping 216.190.230.226 source 216.40.233.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.226, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Reply from 216.190.230.226 : bytes=16 time=89ms TTL=55
Success rate is 100 percent (1/1), round-trip min/avg/max=89/89/89 ms.
223.36#ping 216.190.230.227 source 216.40.233.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.227, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Reply from 216.190.230.227 : bytes=16 time=88ms TTL=119
Success rate is 100 percent (1/1), round-trip min/avg/max=88/88/88 ms.
223.36#ping 216.190.230.225 source 216.40.233.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.225, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Reply from 216.190.230.225 : bytes=16 time=89ms TTL=247
Success rate is 100 percent (1/1), round-trip min/avg/max=89/89/89 ms.
And 216.40.244.1 is reachable from all looking glass servers I tested, so the problem is not fundamental:
route-views.oregon-ix.net>ping 216.40.244.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 216.40.244.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 200/208/216 ms
route-server.as5388.net>ping 216.40.244.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 216.40.244.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 112/112/112 ms
cerf.net:
route-server>ping 216.40.244.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 216.40.244.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 40/40/44 ms
glbx:
route-server.phx1>ping 216.40.244.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 216.40.244.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 72/72/72 ms
att:
route-server>ping 216.40.244.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 216.40.244.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 200/200/200 ms
Now the traces:
223.36#trace 216.190.230.226 source 216.40.244.1
Type Control-c to abort
Tracing the route to IP node 216.190.230.226 from 1 to 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms ivhou-207-218-245-5.ev1.net [207.218.245.5]
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms ge-1-1-0.r02.hstntx01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.10.65]
3 7 ms 7 ms 6 ms p16-1-0-3.r20.dllstx09.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.5.40]
4 47 ms 47 ms 47 ms p16-0-3-0.r20.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.5.35]
5 46 ms 30 ms 46 ms p16-7-0-0.r02.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.2.83]
6 48 ms 40 ms 47 ms p16-1-0-2.r20.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.2.48]
7 47 ms 46 ms 46 ms p16-7-0-0.r02.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.2.83]
8 56 ms 40 ms 40 ms ashburn-ibx.eli.net [206.223.115.46]
9 41 ms * * p7-3.cr01.mcln.eli.net [207.173.114.129]
10 54 ms * * p11-3.cr01.chcg.eli.net [207.173.115.89]
11 * * * ?
12 * * * ?
13 * * * ?
14 * * * ?
15 * * * ?
trace 216.190.230.226 source 216.40.233.1
Type Control-c to abort
Tracing the route to IP node 216.190.230.226 from 1 to 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms ivhou-207-218-245-5.ev1.net [207.218.245.5]
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms ge-1-1-0.r02.hstntx01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.10.65]
3 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms p16-0-3-0.r21.dllstx09.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.5.100]
4 30 ms 30 ms 30 ms p16-0-0-0.r01.atlnga03.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.4.195]
5 46 ms 30 ms 45 ms p16-7-0-0.r02.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.2.83]
6 47 ms 47 ms 47 ms p16-1-0-2.r20.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.2.48]
7 42 ms 46 ms 46 ms p16-7-0-0.r02.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.2.83]
8 43 ms 59 ms 43 ms ashburn-ibx.eli.net [206.223.115.46]
9 79 ms 79 ms 43 ms p7-3.cr01.mcln.eli.net [207.173.114.129]
10 59 ms 80 ms 80 ms srp0-0-0.gw02.slkc.eli.net [208.186.20.54]
11 80 ms 87 ms 80 ms p10-0.cr02.slkc.eli.net [207.173.115.53]
12 80 ms 80 ms 80 ms srp0-0-0.gw02.slkc.eli.net [208.186.20.54]
13 88 ms 88 ms 87 ms gw-cust-IOMATION-COM.slkc.eli.net [216.190.238.98]
14 89 ms 87 ms 88 ms gw-cust-IOMATION-COM.slkc.eli.net [216.190.238.98]
15 89 ms 89 ms 89 ms romeo.qwerks.com [216.190.230.226]
16 88 ms 89 ms 93 ms romeo.qwerks.com [216.190.230.226]
I then found a looking glass that goes inbound through wcg ( telnet://route-server-eu.exodus.net ) :
route-server-eu>trace 216.40.244.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 216.40.244.1
1 dcr04-p9-0.lndn01.exodus.net (212.62.2.73) 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
2 bcr2-so-0-2-0.London.cw.net (166.63.161.129) 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
3 bcr2-so-7-0-0.Thamesside.cw.net (166.63.209.205) 0 msec 0 msec 4 msec
4 dcr2-loopback.NewYork.cw.net (206.24.194.100) 72 msec 72 msec 68 msec
5 agr4-so-2-0-0.NewYork.cw.net (206.24.207.190) 68 msec
agr3-so-2-0-0.NewYork.cw.net (206.24.207.186) 72 msec 72 msec
6 acr2-loopback.NewYork.cw.net (206.24.194.62) 72 msec 72 msec 72 msec
7 206.24.193.206 72 msec 72 msec 68 msec
8 nycmny2wcx3-pos11-0.wcg.net (64.200.87.85) [AS 7911] 68 msec 72 msec 72 msec
9 nycmny2wcx2-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.87.73) [AS 7911] 68 msec 72 msec 72 msec
10 hrndva1wcx2-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.240.46) [AS 7911] 84 msec 88 msec 84 msec
11 hrndva1wcx3.oc48.wcg.net (64.200.95.78) [AS 7911] 88 msec 84 msec 84 msec
12 drvlga1wcx2-pos4-0.wcg.net (64.200.232.125) [AS 7911] 100 msec 96 msec 100 m
sec
13 drvlga1wcx1-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.127.29) [AS 7911] 96 msec 96 msec 100 msec
14 dllstx1wcx3-pos6-0.wcg.net (64.200.240.21) [AS 7911] 268 msec 116 msec 116 m
sec
15 dllstx1wcx2-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.110.77) [AS 7911] 116 msec 116 msec 116 mse
c
16 hstntx1wce2-pos4-0.wcg.net (64.200.240.74) [AS 7911] 120 msec 120 msec 124 m
sec
17 hstntx1wce2-everyonesinternet-gige.wcg.net (65.77.93.54) [AS 7911] 120 msec
124 msec 120 msec
18 ivhou-207-218-223-11.ev1.net (207.218.223.11) [AS 13749] !A !A !A
This suggests the inbound path is good to 216.40.244.1 through wcg, but on a hunch I decided to turn off that prefix inbound through wcg and then retest. Sure enough removing that prefix from wcg inbound seemed to fix the problem:
@223.36#ping 216.190.230.226 source 216.40.244.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.226, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Reply from 216.190.230.226 : bytes=16 time=67ms TTL=48
Success rate is 100 percent (1/1), round-trip min/avg/max=67/67/67 ms.
Then I turned it back on and it was still fixed:
223.36#ping 216.190.230.226 source 216.40.244.1
Sending 1, 16-byte ICMP Echo to 216.190.230.226, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Type Control-c to abort
Reply from 216.190.230.226 : bytes=16 time=70ms TTL=48
Success rate is 100 percent (1/1), round-trip min/avg/max=70/70/70 ms.
So I would conclude that something inbound in the wcg network needed to be toggled. I hope it does not resurface, because it was somewhat difficult to get a clear picture of the problem.
Finally I would like to see another inbound trace. I cannot help but to wonder if it still takes wcg inbound...
Sincerely,
Randy Williams, CTO