On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
Stefan Rompf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But what happens when the link from (2) to (C) fails? The routing protocol
would realize it (actually it was me how has added IFF_RUNNING support to
quagga) and add a route to (C) via (3) on (B). However, the "connected"
route
would still have precedence and the linux IP stack on (2) would happily try
to continue using the broken link to (C), even if we add juju magic to the
link layer to recognize and drop L3 packets.
Linux should just IMHO drop direct route when !IFF_RUNNING.
ACK, please do. It's the kernel's route, the kernel should manage it.
The reason setup of the connected route became automatic in 2.3 was,
iirc, because its pointless to have an UP&RUNNING interface without a
connected route - exact same reasoning suggests that interface which
is !(UP&RUNNING) should have the kernel connected route removed by
kernel.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Leela: Is there some way to keep them from breeding?
Paul: Cold showers don't work on Antarctic creatures.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
