Andrew wrote:
> 
> Hey, I'm working on the rules and routes to implement what I've been talking
> about, and I've got a small question about the ip rule add.
> 
> I'm trying to add a blackhole route, and ip rule add seems to insist that I
> provide a lookup table with the route.
> 
> For instance If I execute the command:
> 
> "ip rule add from 0.0.0.0/0 type blackhole."
> 
> when I look at what it did with "ip rule ls" I see
> 
> "from all lookup main blackhole"
> 
> The only way it seems to get rid of main in the example above is
> to define a dummy table and re-add the route like so:
> 
> "ip rule add from 0.0.0.0/0 lookup bit-bucket type blackhole."
> 
> Then when I see what's done with "ip rule ls" it says:
> 
> "from all lookup bit-bucket blackhole"
> 
> I suppose that's OK. Just seems a bit stilted. Does it matter that the
> bit-bucket table might not contain any routes? In the case of a blackhole route,
> does the kernel even perform the table lookup? Would leaving the default main in
> have been OK?
> 
> -Andrew
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/

Why not use the "default" table?  It's empty anyway, it just seems "right". 
Anyone know something about this I haven't thought of??