From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [Bug 4554] New: /proc/net/route missing info for 127.0.0.1/8 Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 00:58:24 +0200 Message-ID: <42780210.2070607@trash.net> References: <20050503143603.4d77d3dd@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <4277FDFD.3040501@trash.net> <20050503154709.218626c6@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Stephen Hemminger In-Reply-To: <20050503154709.218626c6@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Stephen Hemminger wrote: > It shows up on our 2.4.18 system, probably it got lost in the fib/seq_printf > conversion. > > $ /sbin/route -n > Kernel IP routing table > Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface > 192.168.159.0 172.20.4.11 255.255.255.0 UG 0 0 0 eth2 > 172.20.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth2 > 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo > 0.0.0.0 172.20.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth2 2.4.18 looks similar to 2.4.30 in fib_get_procinfo(), fib_magic() and other functions involved. I believe its simply a change of how userspace sets up the routes: # route -n 172.16.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 0.0.0.0 172.16.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 # route add -net 127.0.0.0/8 lo # route -n 172.16.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 172.16.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 "route" seems to add all routes to the main table. My debian system relies on the kernel setting up loopback correctly, so it doesn't add a route itself. Regards Patrick