Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 23 Aug 2013 15:23:22 +0800
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
To:        Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, will@firepipe.net, gibbs@FreeBSD.org, asomers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: CFR: FIB handling improvements
Message-ID:  <52170DEA.3050602@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130822.032022.481255110184207810.hrs@allbsd.org>
References:  <CADBaqmi6c7v8ojry8uViRi9tK18n8_RaDrP%2BUjvcmEN9guWm3w@mail.gmail.com> <20130822.032022.481255110184207810.hrs@allbsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/22/13 2:20 AM, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Will Andrews <will@firepipe.net> wrote
>    in <CADBaqmi6c7v8ojry8uViRi9tK18n8_RaDrP+UjvcmEN9guWm3w@mail.gmail.com>:
>
> wi> * Always add loopback routes for non-zero FIBs, for both IPv4 and
> wi> IPv6.  Arguably, this could be a policy issue, but it is currently
> wi> less-than-trivial to specify (in rc.conf) that a route needs to be
> wi> applied to every FIB.
>
>   I am not sure why this is needed.  Are the loopback host routes
>   installed into all of the FIBs automatically when lo0 is initialized?
>
>   Even if it is required, get_fibmod() is not necessary.  The following
>   should work:
>
>   # route add -inet 127.0.0.1/8 -iface lo0 -fib all
>
I agree that this one bothers me.
I think that you are making assumptions about what the user will want.
POLA in my experience is that an empty FIB starts out EMPTY,
unless you *specify* it should be initialized with all the interface 
routes, in which case lo0
should be done as well.





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52170DEA.3050602>