Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:30:54 +0100
From:      Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
To:        Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>, "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, Vladimir Ivanov <wawa@yandex-team.ru>,  bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: kern/106722: [net] [patch] ifconfig may not connect	an	interface to known network
Message-ID:  <45F974BE.5050404@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070314161023.GF2713@cell.sick.ru>
References:  <20070314115916.GB2713@cell.sick.ru> <45F81C0D.2000608@FreeBSD.org> <20070314161023.GF2713@cell.sick.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> 
> I was afraid that this would raise an argument on multipath routing. Let's
> temporary do not speak about multipath but just decide what is the correct
> way to remove conflicting routes when we are assigning an IP prefix to a
> local interface?

IMO when configuring a interface with an IP address and network it should
kick out previous host and/or network routes matching it.  Unless those
are from locally configured interfaces, then it should reject the new
attempt.

The current behavior is a big problem when running routing daemons like
OpenBGPD or OpenOSPFD.  If you add a second router to a subnet and that
router receives that subnet already via the routing protocol you can't
configure the interface.

For the routing daemon a RTM_CHANGE in the replacement case is fine.

-- 
Andre



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45F974BE.5050404>