From owner-freebsd-net Fri Nov 2 12:22:54 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com [171.69.24.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9BC37B401 for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:22:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mira-sjc5-2.cisco.com (mira-sjc5-2.cisco.com [171.71.163.16]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id fA2KMoa14280 for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:22:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from stewart.chicago.il.us (ssh-sj1.cisco.com [171.68.225.134]) by mira-sjc5-2.cisco.com (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AAE28306; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:22:47 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3BE30097.C02C828D@stewart.chicago.il.us> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 14:22:47 -0600 From: Randall Stewart X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: SCTP and multiple default routes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Dear all: I am working on a SCTP implementation for KAME and have a question/issue with routing entries in the current freebsd kernel (4.x stream). The issue is quite simple in that SCTP allows one to have multiple destination addresses as part of an association. This is great but without the machine allowing multiple default routes it really does not do a lot of good (except on specific machines that have subnet routes in place to the peer). What would be nice is to have multiple default routes and then have the ability to be able to do a: rt_alloc_alt(...,prev-route); This would then buy the ability to truely take full advantage of the redundancy with a simple extra default route for the multi-homed machine. rt_alloc_alt() would do what rt_alloc does but if it sees prev-route as the answer, it could look further for an alternate. I have no problem with writting the rt_alloc_alt() routine.. but I would also have to dig in and figure out why multiple defaults are not allowed as well.. sigh.. and of course what it might break if I did it. Anyone have any thoughts on this..or has thought of doing this?? Thanks R -- Randall R. Stewart randall@stewart.chicago.il.us 815-342-5222 (cell phone) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message