On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 01:49:54PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Turns out that our stack does a very bad job at tracking which routes
> should be used or not based on the RTF_UP flag. So I'm not going to
> change that.
>
> Nonetheless I'd like to use rtisvalid(9) for the existing route validit
Turns out that our stack does a very bad job at tracking which routes
should be used or not based on the RTF_UP flag. So I'm not going to
change that.
Nonetheless I'd like to use rtisvalid(9) for the existing route validity
checks. This will allow me to move the guts of rt_checkgate() inside
rta
