Adding routes to another table: no such process

Adding routes to another table: no such process

[Ignacy Gawędzki]

Hi,

I'm having a hard time setting some routes on a router and can't find any
relevant information anywhere, so I resort to asking on this list.

The router has one interface, say eth0, with configured address 10.0.0.1/32.

Now I would like to do:

  ip rule add from 10.0.0.1 table 100
  ip route add 10.0.0.2/32 dev eth0 table 100
  ip route add 10.0.0.3/32 via 10.0.0.2 table 100

but I get

  RTNETLINK answers: No such process

on the third command.  It's just as though the kernel refused to use a
gateway for which there's no route in the main table.  Is this an actual
requirement for gateways?  I could find some examples around the web setting
routes with gateways in other tables than main, but they obviously don't work,
yielding the same error message.

Thanks for your help.

Ignacy

-- 
The groove will take you through times without money
much better than money will take you through times without groove.

Re: Adding routes to another table: no such process

[Ignacy Gawędzki]

On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 04:13:06PM +0200, thus spake Ignacy Gawedzki:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm having a hard time setting some routes on a router and can't find any
> relevant information anywhere, so I resort to asking on this list.
> 
> The router has one interface, say eth0, with configured address 10.0.0.1/32.
> 
> Now I would like to do:
> 
>   ip rule add from 10.0.0.1 table 100
>   ip route add 10.0.0.2/32 dev eth0 table 100
>   ip route add 10.0.0.3/32 via 10.0.0.2 table 100
> 
> but I get
> 
>   RTNETLINK answers: No such process

Okay, I think I got it right, at last.  Apparently it all depends on how the
rules are set up.

The rule to lookup table 100 when the source address is 10.0.0.1 doesn't
concern the general situation of route to 10.0.0.2/32 (for which packets may
have any source address).

The solution in my case is to put

  ip rule add to 10.0.0.0/8 table 100

Cheers,

Ignacy

-- 
:wq!