> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 12:58:56PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> > On 5/2/18 12:53 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> > >
> > > So this fixes the issue for me. To reproduce:
> > >
> > > # ip -6 address add 2001:db8::1/64 dev dummy0
> > > # ip -6 address add 2001:db8::1/64 dev dummy1
> > >
> > > This reproduces the issue because due to above commit both local routes
> > > are considered siblings... :/
> > >
> > > local 2001:db8::1 proto kernel metric 0
> > > nexthop dev dummy0 weight 1
> > > nexthop dev dummy1 weight 1 pref medium
> > >
> > > I think it's best to revert the patch and have Thomas submit a fixed
> > > version to net-next. I was actually surprised to see it applied to net.
> >
> > ugly side effect of the way ecmp routes are managed in IPv6. I think
> > revert is the best option for now.
>
> OK. I'll send a patch.
fe80::/64 proto kernel metric 256
nexthop dev vlan1 weight 1
nexthop dev vlan10 weight 1
nexthop dev vlan30 weight 1
nexthop dev tunnel11 weight 1
nexthop dev tunnel12 weight 1
Sorry I completely missed that, I was always looking at other route tables.
Should I look at reworking this? It would be great to have these ECMP routes
for other purposes.
ip -6 ro show table 601
default metric 1024
nexthop dev tunnel11 weight 1
nexthop dev tunnel12 weight 1
