Parshas Eikev 5784 (Haaros)

The travel route mentioned here, as Rashi points out, is discussing the instance where some of Klal Yisrael began a mutiny against Moshe and attempted to return to Egypt.
Passuk 6 relates the two locations in their itinerary in their travels back to Egypt, and passuk 7 details the locations they passed on their route back "on track."
However, the exact locations of the "return stops", in passuk 7, are unclear.
If we learn that "Gudgod" is shorthand for "Chor HaGudgod" and "Yatvasa" is the city "Yatvasa", it would be somewhat absurd. By going to Chur HaGudgod, they aren't making progress towards Hor HaHor / Tzalmona, the next leg of the journey.
But the issue is compounded if you learn that Yatvas is the city of Yatvas, because then you would need to explain why they would go further towards Egypt in getting back on track!
(I showed on the map below what the route would look like according to this "simple" explanation. The mutiny-route is in red and the return route is in blue, credit to map by Bible Basics by Jerome Hahn)

I saw that the Ibn Ezra explains the locations of the passuk, and I think he may be coming to explain this because of the issue that learning according to the "simple" explanation results in. Ibn Ezra says:

This is how the routes look according to Ibn Ezra:

Endnote:
I noticed something interesting about the route that they began to take towards Egypt. Based on their trajectory, they were heading south, and heading straight into the Red Sea. Why didn't they bear further north and make a more direct route for Egypt?
Perhaps to strengthen the question, it could stand to reason that they would want to love in Goshen, which is in Northern Egypt, since that is where the pasture lands were, and presumably wanting to become sheppards?
(The red line shows the path they took and the dotted lines is the trajectory based on the route they took, and the blue dotted line represents the "proposed" trajectory that would lead straight into Egypt.

Perhaps the reason they went back the way Hashem had taken them is because that path was chosen originally because there were pasture lands available at each stopping point along the way. By going back the same route, they were guaranteed to be able to keep their flocks fed throughout the entire journey back.
The Seforno supports this interpretation. He explains that the route was selected with the needs of the livestock in mind, ensuring there would be adequate grazing available at the different encampments. Seforno writes: