From: Ard van Breemen <ard@kwaak.net>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LARTC] Possible kernel bug with routes
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 18:32:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060404183240.GJ1427@kwaak.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4427B6E4.5020804@anduras.de>
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 11:56:52AM +0200, Sven Anders wrote:
<snipped a lot>
> > ip route add 10.100.0.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link
> RTNETLINK answers: File exists
s/add/append/
> I thought they are different!?!
> Is here any difference I did not see?
> If they are not different, why does the kernel not recognize it
> (see above) and avoid the duplicate entry?
add prevents duplicates, append just adds.
> Another question:
>
> Why can't I set a route on an interface that is down?
That's by some design. Use patches from linuxvirtualserver.org if
you want them to exist.
> I can set an address, so why not a route?
You don't set an address... The address exists only at the moment
the interface comes up. Before that you don't have the address
(active in your ip stack)
> I there a reason for that?
> As far as I understand routing should be handled independed from
> the addresses...
Jups
> Example:
> > ip link set down dev eth0
> > ip addr add 10.100.0.1/24 dev eth0
> > ip route add 10.100.0.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link
> RTNETLINK answers: Network is down
The ip is not there yet.
ip link set up dev eth0 # Activate interfaces
ip a add 127.0.0.1/32 dev eth0 # Bind interface to ipv4 stack
ip a add 10.100.0.1/32 dev lo # We need a public ip on our ip stack
# Add the route to the interface with sane src ip.
ip route add 10.100.0.0/24 dev eth0 src 10.100.0.1
> PPS: Why is ANYBODY still ignoring this e-mail for over 3 weeks?????
People are busy :-)
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-04 18:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-27 9:56 [LARTC] Possible kernel bug with routes Sven Anders
2006-04-04 18:32 ` Ard van Breemen [this message]
2006-04-09 18:10 ` Sven Anders
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060404183240.GJ1427@kwaak.net \
--to=ard@kwaak.net \
--cc=lartc@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.