Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 21:41:58 -0600 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: dg@root.com Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Have I left something out? Message-ID: <35567386.7E493152@softweyr.com> References: <199805100532.WAA16228@implode.root.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Greenman wrote:
> >"The Right Way" to fix it is with a function that walks the route table
> >and deletes all the routes whose ifp points to the ifnet being detached.
> >I haven't had time to poke into the FreeBSD sources yet. If nobody else
> >gets this, I'll look into it as soon as I get my plate cleared at work
> >a bit.
>
> This is normally done by the routing daemon. In the case of routed, it
> scans the list of interfaces periodically for changes. For gated, it has
> a socket open for up/down change events and takes care of business as soon
> as it sees the change. I'm inclined to think that this functionality
> should stay in the route daemon where it has always been since deleting
> the routes to the interface may not be the correct course of action.
There was some naive code in the 4.2-based VxWorks stack that would
actually attempt to route code through these "dangling" ifp pointers.
This apparently led to occasional system crashes. We should at least
make certain this is not the case in the FreeBSD code.
Our IP routing team decided it was never appropriate to leave routes
through detached interfaces in the current routing table. Your
mileage may vary.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
http://www.softweyr.com/~softweyr wes@softweyr.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?35567386.7E493152>