Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 11:04:31 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: Jochen Gensch <incmc@gmx.de>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Default route doesn't change to wireless device (ath0) Message-ID: <4321501F.8060205@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20050908214834.GA8000@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: <20050901225346.0923E16A41F@hub.freebsd.org> <200509072128.04819.incmc@gmx.de> <20050907194130.GA2436@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <200509072223.20560.incmc@gmx.de> <20050907211811.GA19570@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0509081426360.18161@ngwee.ugcs.caltech.edu> <20050908214834.GA8000@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brooks Davis wrote: > On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 02:40:06PM -0700, Jon Dama wrote: > >> >>>>And whenever there is a wireless network available (where the system can log >>>>in an get a network connection) the default route should be switched to that >>>>wireless nic. Or even better, if both connections work, automatically choose >>>>the faster one :-). >>> >>>That's the goal we're headed towards. Unfortunatly, it's not an instant >>>thing, particularly when people trying things like what you're doing >>>that don't map well into the old world view of static devices that don't >>>change networks. The old model is wrong and has been so for quite some >>>time, but that doesn't mean there aren't assumptions related to it all >>>over the place. >> >>Again, the problem is with the routing code. You should NOT need to be >>deleting default routes simply because one link goes down and another >>comes up on a different interface. >> >>Deleting the route simply because the interface went down is a hack. > > Got a new routing implemention handy? Until then, well have to live > with hacks. :( It's on my TODO list for my funded time. I've postponed work until FreeBSD 6.0R is out though. -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4321501F.8060205>