Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 Mar 2007 23:06:52 +0300
From:      Anton Yuzhaninov <citrin@citrin.ru>
To:        "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re[2]: kern/106722: [net] [patch] ifconfig may not connect an interface to known network
Message-ID:  <6110191101.20070314230652@citrin.ru>
In-Reply-To: <45F81C0D.2000608@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <20070314115916.GB2713@cell.sick.ru> <45F81C0D.2000608@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Wednesday, March 14, 2007, 7:00:13 PM, Bruce M. Simpson wrote:

BMS> Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
>> AFAIK, the problem needs a more generic approach. I see two approaches.
>>
>> 1) Introduce RTM_CHANGEADD, a command that will forcibly add route,
>> deleting all conflicting ones. Use this command in in_addprefix().
>>
>> 2) In rt_flags field we still have several extra bits. We can use
>> them to specify route source - RTS_CONNECTED, RTS_STATIC, RTS_XXX,
>> where XXX is a routing protocol. When issuing RTM_ADD a route with
>> a preferred source (e.g. CONNECTED vs STATIC) will override the old
>> one.
>>

BMS> I understand that they are being proposed to address problems we 
BMS> currently have in the stack, i.e. that we do not support multipathing,
BMS> though it is more than likely they will be blown away in future when the
BMS> architecture changes (and it has to change).

IMHO question is not related to multipathing.
Kernel routes now don't contain administrative distance and it root of
this problem.

RTS_CONNECTED, RTS_STATIC is a hack adding some fixed AD values
without increasing route size in memory.

-- 
 WBR,
 Anton Yuzhaninov




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6110191101.20070314230652>