O traceroute não mostra todos os saltos da sua rede, mas apenas mostra quantas camada 3 saltam estão sendo feitas.
Uma maneira mais simples de entender é que qualquer dispositivo de rede que não diminua o TTL não será exibido em um traceroute como esta resposta no site do Network Engineering Stack Exchange explica:
Any device, that does not decrement IP TTL field value is not going to show up in the traceroute path. For example, Cisco ASA Firewall can be configured to decrement the IP TTL field for packets traversing the firewall (set connection decrement-ttl). By default, the TTL is not being decremented, thus hiding (well, somewhat) the firewall.
Mais informações podem ser obtidas aqui na página DSLReports intitulada “Devo usar o switch ou o roteador da Camada 3?” :
In general, you want to use a router when most of the time the device does routing. Likewise, you want to use a switch when when most of the time the device does switching. This statement becomes more apparent when dealing with larger network like an ISP or large corporation.
Além de esta discussão no Reddit intitulada “Roteador versus Camada 3: qual é a diferença?” e especificamente esta resposta de "Xipher":
It's not really a functional difference. To me it's based on primary purpose.
An L3 switch routes, but usually with a much smaller routing table, and can only support a single a single set of VLANs. It's functionality will probably be pretty limited as well. Some switches are supporting a limited set of MPLS features, but that's mostly in the data center space.
A router can usually support a lot more routes. Most handle about a million or more IPv4 routes for current routers. Some will support switching, and even support overlapping VLAN space for the purpose of carrying customers L2 tunnels. Additional features like MPLS applications are also more common with routers.