惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
博客园 - 【当耐特】
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
IT之家
IT之家
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
小众软件
小众软件
美团技术团队
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
The GitHub Blog
The GitHub Blog
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler
Recorded Future
Recorded Future
H
Help Net Security
aimingoo的专栏
aimingoo的专栏
Y
Y Combinator Blog
博客园_首页
A
About on SuperTechFans
MongoDB | Blog
MongoDB | Blog
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
V
Visual Studio Blog
D
DataBreaches.Net
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
B
Blog
The Register - Security
The Register - Security
I
InfoQ
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
雷峰网
雷峰网
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
月光博客
月光博客
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
N
Netflix TechBlog - Medium
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
Stack Overflow Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
Jina AI
Jina AI
Security Archives - TechRepublic
Security Archives - TechRepublic
Hacker News - Newest:
Hacker News - Newest: "LLM"
U
Unit 42
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
W
WeLiveSecurity
Latest news
Latest news
Exploit-DB.com RSS Feed
Exploit-DB.com RSS Feed
博客园 - 叶小钗
L
Lohrmann on Cybersecurity
博客园 - Franky
Recent Commits to openclaw:main
Recent Commits to openclaw:main
K
KPMG report finds enterprise disconnect between AI and its ROI | CIO

Datadog | The Monitor blog

Introducing our open source AI-native SAST Instrument and monitor Boomi integration flows with OpenTelemetry and Datadog Not all index scans are equal: How we cut query latency by over 99% Platform engineering metrics: What to measure and what to ignore Integrate Recorded Future threat intelligence with Datadog Cloud SIEM CI/CD security: threat modeling using a MITRE-style threat matrix CI/CD security: How to secure your GitHub ecosystem Ingress NGINX is EOL: A practical guide for migrating to Kubernetes Gateway API Operating agentic AI with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore and Datadog LLM Observability: Lessons from NTT DATA Introducing the Datadog Code Security MCP Capture and analyze custom heatmaps in Session Replay Understand session replays faster with AI summaries and smart chapters Monitor ClickHouse query performance with Datadog Database Monitoring How we designed empathetic alert sounds for on-call engineers Search and act across Datadog to resolve issues faster with Bits Assistant Measure the business impact of every product change with Datadog Experiments Analyzing round trip query latency Configuring JavaScript caches for better performance Introducing Bits AI Dev Agent for Code Security Datadog achieves ISO 42001 certification for responsible AI Monitor Nutanix clusters, hosts, and VMs with Datadog Monitor Juniper Mist in Datadog A new Host Map for modern infrastructure Annotate traces to improve LLM quality with Datadog LLM Observability What’s new in Cloud SIEM: AI-powered investigations, enhanced threat intelligence, and scalable security operations Explore Kubernetes with native OpenTelemetry data Monitor Oracle Fusion Cloud Applications with Datadog Announcing the Datadog Terraform provider v4.0.0 Scaling Kubernetes workloads on custom metrics How to design cloud environments for AI-powered threat analysis Monitor Aruba Central in Datadog How we centralize and remediate risks with Datadog Case Management Accelerate incident response with Datadog and ServiceNow Monitor your application and network load balancer logs Understanding Karpenter architecture for Kubernetes autoscaling Tools for collecting metrics and logs from Karpenter Monitor Karpenter with Datadog What your product data is actually saying Key metrics for monitoring Karpenter Securing Datadog’s platform in the AI age: The role of observability data Four ways engineering teams use the Datadog MCP Server to power AI agents Approaching your observability migration with the right mindset Meet the new Bits AI SRE: Deeper reasoning, twice as fast Key learnings from the 2026 State of DevSecOps study Use plain English to query your multi-cloud infrastructure in Resource Catalog Simplifying troubleshooting across the user journey with Datadog Synthetic Monitoring Protect your OCI resources with Datadog Cloud Security This Month in Datadog - February 2026 Amazon EC2 security: How misconfigured and public AMIs expand your cloud attack surface Enable end-to-end visibility into your Java apps with a single command Measure and improve mobile app startup performance with Datadog RUM Evaluating our AI Guard application to improve quality and control cost Identify untested code across every level of your codebase Make use of guardrail metrics and stop babysitting your releases Monitor Versa Networks SD-WAN performance in Datadog Improve performance and reliability with APM Recommendations Remediate transitive vulnerabilities faster with Datadog Software Composition Analysis Generate audit-ready vulnerability and compliance reports with Datadog Sheets Monitor Fortinet FortiManager performance in Datadog Improve test coverage across codebases with Datadog Code Coverage Move fast, don’t break things: Consistent testing standards at scale Enrich logs with ServiceNow CMDB context before routing to any SIEM or logging tool Monitor Lustre with Datadog Make faster, better product decisions with Datadog Product Analytics Surface and remediate runtime posture issues with Workload Protection Findings Protect agentic AI applications with Datadog AI Guard How to optimize JavaScript code with CSS Trace Google Pub/Sub workloads in Cloud Run with Datadog Detect human names in logs with ML in Sensitive Data Scanner How we cut our NLQ agent debugging time from hours to minutes with LLM Observability Debug PostgreSQL query latency faster with EXPLAIN ANALYZE in Datadog Database Monitoring Datadog acquires Propolis Unify and correlate frontend and backend data with retention filters Scale compliance across global frameworks with Datadog Cloud Security Monitor Arista VeloCloud SD-WAN performance with Datadog Building reliable dashboard agents with Datadog LLM Observability Simplify log collection and aggregation for MSSPs with Datadog Observability Pipelines Mitigation for Node.js denial-of-service vulnerability affecting Datadog APM Automate flaky test fixes with the Bits AI Dev Agent and Test Optimization How we built an AI SRE agent that investigates like a team of engineers Datadog integrations 2025 recap: Observability for AI, security, and hybrid cloud Design effective executive dashboards with Datadog Implement dbt data quality checks with dbt-expectations Bring faster visibility into AWS Lambda functions with remote instrumentation Troubleshoot faster with the GitLab Source Code integration in Datadog How Cambia Health Solutions saved $30,000 monthly with Cloud Cost Management and the Datadog Resource Catalog Normalize any logs for Cloud SIEM with Datadog's OCSF processor Optimizing Datadog at scale: Cost-efficient observability at Zendesk Detect, diagnose, and resolve network issues easily with CNM Network Health Connect engineering errors to user impact in early-stage products Cilium configuration for Kubernetes operations at scale Designing feedback loops for progressive delivery Ship features faster and safer with Datadog Feature Flags Choosing the right OpenTelemetry Collector distribution Route your monitor alerts with Datadog monitor notification rules Automate Cloud SIEM investigations with Bits AI Security Analyst Cloud threat detection: How to identify risky activity across control and data planes Collecting Kafka performance metrics Monitoring Kafka with Datadog Monitoring Kafka performance metrics
Test network paths with TCP, UDP, and ICMP in Datadog
Addie Beach, Younes Berradia, Hiba Ijjaali · 2026-04-23 · via Datadog | The Monitor blog

When developers and SREs design application tests, they often prioritize user workflows and API availability. Extending that suite with network tests that match your app’s traffic protocols can reveal whether issues originate in the network or application layer.

In this post, we’ll explore how you can design effective network tests using the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), User Datagram Protocol (UDP), or Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP), including:

  • Choosing the right protocol for your network tests

  • Simulating realistic traffic using synthetic tests

How to choose the right network test protocol

Traceroute-based tests are a common way to measure network health. By showing you the amount of time it takes for devices to respond to incoming requests, traceroute queries enable you to measure performance along every step of the network path, from the intermediary hosts to the destination server.

Depending on your testing tool, you may be able to run these queries over different protocols, usually ICMP, TCP, or UDP. Choosing a protocol that matches your app’s traffic—such as UDP for media streaming or TCP for web services—helps ensure your performance metrics reflect actual user experience. It can also help you determine how your app may interact with network components that can restrict traffic, such as firewalls.

Traceroute queries include two parts:

  • The request sent to each device in a network path

  • The reply sent from these devices, which is used to measure latency and availability

Requests and replies can be communicated using different protocols. For example, traceroutes use ICMP to send replies from intermediary hosts. Depending on your testing tool, however, you may be able to send the initial request over a different protocol like UDP or TCP.

Which protocol to test with: ICMP, TCP, or UDP?

Different protocols produce different kinds of results. ICMP is used for network diagnostics, as it has no transport layer and doesn’t support packet sequencing or retransmission. By contrast, TCP and UDP include more advanced functionality for handling packet transmission and are designed to carry app data, which enables them to reveal more about how your app behaves under real traffic conditions. Therefore, implementing traceroute queries with TCP or UDP enables you to gain additional insight into retransmission behavior and congestion response. Compared to ICMP, routers and firewalls are also less likely to rate limit or block TCP and UDP traffic.

TCP is useful for tracking the rate of successful data delivery, which can help you evaluate network throughput. By contrast, UDP helps you determine how well your system performs under heavy sustained traffic and measure characteristics like jitter.

TCP tracks connection state to guarantee reliable delivery. By treating data as a stream of sequenced bytes, TCP ensures that information is received in the order it was sent. Note that in high-jitter environments, this can lead to head-of-line (HoL) blocking, where the stack waits for a missing or delayed segment before passing subsequent data to the app, potentially causing significant latency.

Additionally, if a TCP packet is not acknowledged in a set timeframe, the sending device will automatically attempt to retransmit the data. If too many acknowledgements are missed, the sending device may trigger a retransmission timeout (RTO) mechanism to limit network congestion and help stabilize the connection. Depending on your operating system and network configuration, RTOs may last anywhere from 200 milliseconds to upwards of 120 seconds. Like HoL blocking, this can result in noticeable latency. These performance impacts mean that TCP is generally used for apps where data accuracy and reliability is more important than speed.

By contrast, UDP doesn’t attempt to sequence or retransmit packets. While these features make UDP less reliable than TCP, they also help UDP perform faster. Therefore, UDP is often used in situations where high-speed transmission is critical, like live video streaming, voice calls, or fast-paced games.

When to use SYN vs. SACK for TCP traceroute tests

Besides offering different protocol options to test with, testing tools may allow you to customize the requests themselves. For example, Network Path tests in Datadog Synthetic Monitoring let you choose between SYN and SACK strategies for TCP-based tests.

Network Path testing in Datadog Synthetic Monitoring with TCP protocol selected and SYN and SACK strategy options, enabling protocol-accurate traceroute testing.

TCP uses three-way handshaking (SYN, SYN-ACK, ACK) to establish sessions, helping ensure that the destination port is available and data is transmitted reliably. Handshaking identifies “zombified” or “half-open” connections where a port may be open but the app is unresponsive. When sending test requests over TCP in Datadog synthetic tests, you can decide whether you want to send a full handshake (SACK) or a one-way request (SYN).

SYN is the standard option for most tests, as the partial connection means that traceroute queries will run even if the destination port is closed. However, firewalls may misinterpret SYN requests as SYN floods or port scans. In these situations, you can use TCP SACK instead, which simulates a new session opening with each traceroute query. Keep in mind that not all targets support TCP SACK, which may result in test failures.

How to simulate realistic network traffic using Datadog Synthetic Monitoring

Not every operating system makes it easy to use different protocols within your tests. For example, to send traceroute requests over TCP, you may need to install third-party tools like tracetcp for Windows or tcptraceroute for Linux and macOS. And once you’ve installed these tools, you may need to manually set up cron jobs to schedule each of your traceroute tests.

Datadog Synthetic Monitoring enables you to create and schedule Network Path tests that use either ICMP, UDP, or TCP to send requests. As your test runs finish, the results are visualized as diagrams showing the flow of requests through every host in your network. You can view these results alongside the rest of your synthetic test findings, such as those from your API, browser, and mobile tests.

Network Path test results in Datadog Synthetic Monitoring showing latency along multiple hops, isolating a network-level performance issue.

Let’s say that you’re an SRE. A few updates to your video streaming app have led to complaints of increased pixelation and frozen frames from users. To rule out potential network issues as the cause, you create a Network Path test that uses UDP requests to accurately replicate your traffic.

Datadog enables you to specify factors such as:

  • The maximum time to live (TTL) for these requests

  • The number of end-to-end queries sent to the destination server

  • The number of traceroute queries executed per test run

You can also create an assertion that defines success for your test. In this case, you set the success condition as an average packet loss below 0.5%. You also decide to schedule these tests to run every five minutes, which helps you quickly catch issues without being overwhelmed by brief changes in network capacity or performance. Finally, you set your test to alert you if any two consecutive runs fail.

Soon you’re notified of a potential issue related to a new app release. While ruling out potential causes, you notice an alert from your Network Path test. In the test results, you see that one of the hops along the traceroute path resulted in errors, suggesting that the issue originates in your network configuration. This means you don’t need to loop your app team in right away. Instead, you forward this information to your network team for further troubleshooting.

Visualize end-to-end network health with Datadaog Synthetic Network Path tests

Sending traceroute requests over the protocol of your choice can give you a more accurate understanding of your network performance. By correlating protocol-specific test results with hop-by-hop visualizations, you can determine if a latency spike is a universal network issue (ICMP/UDP) or an application-layer negotiation failure (TCP). You can even use a combination of tests running on various protocols to evaluate different aspects of your network health. UDP provides visibility into real-time performance and packet loss, while TCP enables you to better measure overall reliability and firewall traversal.

While you may be able to use some of these protocols with native traceroute tests, creating your network tests in Datadog Synthetic Monitoring gives you access to additional protocols, greater control over configuration parameters like TTL and query count, and automated scheduling.

You can use our documentation to get started with Synthetic Monitoring and Network Path tests. Or, if you’re new to Datadog, you can sign up for a 14-day free trial.