On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 05:57:09PM -0700, patrick keshishian wrote: > On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Philip Guenther<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:36 AM, patrick keshishian<[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> Maybe I just wrote too many words. In simple terms, once a new route > >> has been added to the routing table, all traffic should consider the > >> new route right? So, is the ppp interface treated differently when it > >> comes to routing in OpenBSD? > > > > Does this quote from the netstat(8) manpage explain the behavior? > > B B Connection oriented protocols normally hold on to a single route > > B B for the duration of a connection while connectionless protocols obtain > a > > B B route while sending to the same destination. > > ah, yes. this is good, as it confirms part of my observation; note > that i was not specific on the type of socket used, because it did not > make a difference. I simply said "same socket descriptor", indicating > one created prior to the establishment of the new route. > > e.g., I can start a ping going for the particular host on the remote > network, next establish the route and the pings continue out on the > physical interface. If I start a new ping, those packets, now, go > through the ppp0 interface. As verified with tcpdump. > > So, it seems, based on my observations, routes are "sticky" with > respect to sockets; even non-TCP sockets, which seems bit odd. Do you > not agree? >
Yes, sockets cache routes and that's good and it will most probably not change anytime soon. If the route becomes unavailable a new lookup will be done. -- :wq Claudio
