From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 15:33:53 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20090223.153353.237733933.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20090220171912.GA7315@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <20090220.121508.252047266.davem@davemloft.net> <20090223143830.GA23244@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: homecreate@list.ru, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:38134 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751023AbZBWXeN (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:34:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090223143830.GA23244@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:38:30 -0500 > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:15:08PM -0800, David Miller wrote: > > The route is tied to the IP address, and the route is therefore > > created and destroyed alongside the IP address. > > That's how it works now. It wasn't how it worked in linux a long > time ago. Long ago you had to create the route yourself in userspace > (which was actually to some extent better than the current setup). > The current method is simpler to understand for your typical user though. I don't remember Linux ever not creating a subnet route when an IP address was added to an interface. And I also don't remember Linux ever deleting an IP address on interface down. Maybe it happened back in 0.99pl5 times, but we're talking at least 10 years ago.