From owner-freebsd-security Sun Jun 30 17:44:34 1996 Return-Path: owner-security Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA02763 for security-outgoing; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:44:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ulc199.residence.gatech.edu (root@ulc199.residence.gatech.edu [199.77.162.99]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA02754 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 17:44:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from ken@localhost) by ulc199.residence.gatech.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA24617 Sun, 30 Jun 1996 20:44:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth Merry Message-Id: <199607010044.UAA24617@ulc199.residence.gatech.edu> Subject: Re: Is "routed -q" necessary? To: taob@io.org (Brian Tao) Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 20:44:21 -2800 (EDT) Cc: security@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from Brian Tao at "Jun 30, 96 07:55:57 pm" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL15 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-security@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Brian Tao wrote: > On Sun, 30 Jun 1996, Kenneth Merry wrote: > > > > It depends on what your network setup looks like. If you control all > > the machines on your subnet, there's no problem with running routed > > -q. > > Since I only have one default router anyway, there is no need to > run routed at all? I figured it might help keep the routing tables > down to a manageable size, with static and dynamic IP connections > coming and going all the time. Well, there *might* be a reason to run routed, even if you only have one default router, and you hardwire the default router in ahead of time. It might make it easier if you ever had to take the default router down, and didn't want the machines on the subnet to lose connectivity. You could put in a replacement router, and have it start advertising itself as the default route. Hopefully the machines on the subnet would pick up on that (because of routed) and use the replacement router. Then, you could take the 'normal' router down. As for keeping routing tables down to a manageable size, I dunno. Machines I've seen at work tend to pick up lots of unnecessary routes when running routed. Machines that don't run routed only have the routes that are necessary -- one for hosts on the same subnet, and the 'default' route, for everything else. Someone more familiar with routing stuff might have a better answer, though. I'm speaking from experience in a somewhat limited environment. Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@ulc199.residence.gatech.edu Disclaimer: I don't speak for GTRI, GT, or Elvis.