From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Schultz Subject: [net-next]: unable to add routes to tables Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:57:15 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <1029376325.2912846.1439917035503.JavaMail.zimbra@tpip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail.tpip.net ([92.43.49.48]:60015 "EHLO mail.tpip.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753500AbbHRQ5X (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Aug 2015 12:57:23 -0400 Received: from office.tpip.net (office.tpip.net [92.43.51.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.tpip.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65B0E4F404 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 16:57:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by office.tpip.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56CFBA2F1D for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:57:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from office.tpip.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (office.tpip.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 4FIr4Tt9h3ZJ for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:57:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by office.tpip.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 990E8A2F31 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:57:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from office.tpip.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (office.tpip.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id SthI14RFWUC6 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:57:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from office.tpip.net (office.tpip.net [92.43.51.2]) by office.tpip.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8488CA2F1D for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:57:15 +0200 (CEST) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, It seems that the policy for adding routes to tables has changed between Linux 4.2-rc6 and net-next. In Linux main line (tested up to 4.2-rc6), with this main routing table: # ip route show table main ... 172.28.0.0/24 dev vnf-xe1p0 proto kernel scope link src 172.28.0.16 and an empty table 100, this works: # ip route add 10.0.0.0/8 via 172.28.0.32 table 100 dev vnf-xe1p0 With net-next at commit d52736e24fe2e927c26817256f8d1a3c8b5d51a0, the same command leads to an: # ip route add 10.0.0.0/8 via 172.28.0.32 table 100 dev vnf-xe1p0 RTNETLINK answers: Resource temporarily unavailable Is this expected behavior? Andreas