Why my 2nd ip from traceroute is not answering the ping anymore? [closed]

My Internet is really laggy today, I did a tracerout and I realize that I'm having no answer from an ip at the beginning of the traceroute. see:

Tracing route to 12.129.202.154 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.1 
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3     8 ms     8 ms     8 ms  bd044008.virtua.com.br [189.4.64.8] 
  4     9 ms     8 ms     8 ms  bd044009.virtua.com.br [189.4.64.9] 
  5    26 ms    26 ms    24 ms  embratel-T0-1-5-0-tacc01.cas.embratel.net.br [200.174.243.21] 
  6   360 ms    15 ms    12 ms  ebt-T0-15-0-12-tcore01.ctamc.embratel.net.br [200.244.140.218] 
  7   330 ms   349 ms   261 ms  ebt-Bundle-POS11942-intl04.mianap.embratel.net.br [200.230.220.10] 
  8   139 ms   141 ms   139 ms  sl-st30-mia-.sprintlink.net [144.223.64.221] 

Connection diagram: PC - Router configured as access point - Router (192.168.0.1) - Cable modem (192.168.100.1).

Well, I think it is odd that the 2nd ip is not returning the ping. I looked some old tracerout logs to see what was the 2nd ip. The ip was: 10.19.0.1

So, what this 2nd ip stand for? How can I find why it is not answering the ping? I don't understand it, if does not answer the ping, how can the packets continue (yeah newbie question)?

edit: well, because the hope 3 have a ping of 8 ms the hop 2 request time out should really not be a problem. But it is still odd that the 2nd hop stopped to answer ping request. So my doubts are:
1. Were the ip 10.19.0.1 is from?
2. Why it stopped to answer ping requests?
3. How can hop 7 be smaller than 6 and 8 smaller than 7 and 6!?? Shouldn't the pings be higher for each hop? Like: hop 3 time should be the sum of the hops before it plus its own time (hop 3 = 1+2+3) ??

Solution 1:

A router's job is to route packets. It's not a ping responder. It can route packets just fine even if it can't respond to pings. Since you're seeing latency of less than a hundredth of a second to the hop after it and no packet loss, I'd say it's routing just fine.

How can hop 7 be smaller than 6 and 8 smaller than 7 and 6!?? Shouldn't the pings be higher for each hop? Like: hop 3 time should be the sum of the hops before it plus its own time (hop 3 = 1+2+3) ??

Because some routers are great routers and lousy traceroute responders. That's not their main job, so they're generally not optimized for it. When your traceroute stops on a hop, you're measuring that hop's ability to respond to a traceroute. When it goes through a hop, you're measuring its ability to forward traffic. If you were designing a router, which would you optimize?

There's another possibility, but it's not common. The route could be asymmetric. If the longer route takes a better return path, the time can be lower.