From: bert hubert <ahu@ds9a.nl>
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Request for TEXT: [LARTC] "onlink" option for ip route
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 14:14:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-lartc-98552976605954@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-lartc-98546988301347@msgid-missing>
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 12:43:07AM -0300, Rogerio Brito wrote:
> On Mar 24 2001, bert hubert wrote:
> > If someone manages to write a reasonable explanation for the
> > 'onlink' option, I'll put it in the HOWTO ASAP.
>
> As far as I understand it, the situation is as follows:
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Sometimes, you may want to send packets via a machine
> (i.e., a gateway) which is physically connected to your
> network, but to which you don't specifically have a route in
> your kernel routing table.
I'm more confused then ever!
Alexey says this:
A: Yes, in 2.2 the rule that {\em normal} gateway must reside on directly
connected network has not any exceptions. You may tell kernel, that
this particular route is {\em abnormal}:
\begin{verbatim}
ifconfig tunl0 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.255
ip route add 10.0.0.0/8 via 193.233.7.65 dev tunl0 onlink
\end{verbatim}
Note keyword \verb|onlink|, it is the magic key that orders kernel
not to check for consistency of gateway address.
Probably, after this explanation you have already guessed another method
to cheat kernel:
\begin{verbatim}
ifconfig tunl0 10.0.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.255
route add -host 193.233.7.65 dev tunl0
route add -net 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0 gw 193.233.7.65
route del -host 193.233.7.65 dev tunl0
\end{verbatim}
Well, if you like such tricks, nobody may prohibit you to use them.
Only do not forget
that between \verb|route add| and \verb|route del| host 193.233.7.65 is
unreachable.
However, our HOWTO says this:
ip tunnel add netb mode gre remote 172.19.20.21 local 172.16.17.18 ttl 255
ip link set netb up
ip addr add 10.0.1.1 dev netb
ip route add 10.0.2.0/24 dev netb
We don't use onlink - might it be that 'onlink' is only useful for ipip
tunnels?
> Please let me know if this is acceptable. I could write with
> more details (giving a more concrete example), but I'm very
> busy right now. :-(
Once this is cleared up, your text will do fine. Thanks!
Regards,
bert
--
http://www.PowerDNS.com Versatile DNS Services
Trilab The Technology People
'SYN! .. SYN|ACK! .. ACK!' - the mating call of the internet
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-25 14:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-24 21:36 Request for TEXT: [LARTC] "onlink" option for ip route bert hubert
2001-03-25 3:43 ` Rogerio Brito
2001-03-25 14:14 ` bert hubert [this message]
2001-03-25 17:25 ` Guy Van Den Bergh
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=marc-lartc-98552976605954@msgid-missing \
--to=ahu@ds9a.nl \
--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.