Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 04:55:59 -0300 From: H <hm@hm.net.br> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: sthaug@nethelp.no, Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net> Subject: Re: How to bind a route to a network adapter and not IP Message-ID: <201206190456.13409.hm@hm.net.br> In-Reply-To: <201206182307.10050.hselasky@c2i.net> References: <4FDB6AA3.3040606@gmail.com> <201206181803.41211.hm@hm.net.br> <201206182307.10050.hselasky@c2i.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart4499585.QzosB4aL3A Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Monday 18 June 2012 18:07 Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > On Monday 18 June 2012 23:03:34 H wrote: > > On Monday 18 June 2012 12:54 Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > > > On Monday 18 June 2012 00:00:51 H wrote: > > > > sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: > > > > >>> I loose packets because I use a WLAN adapter. Sometimes the link > > > > >>> is down for various reasons, and then the routes start changing > > > > >>> for manually created routes, and I want to prevent that. > > > > >>=20 > > > > >> well that is certainly not a reason for changing routes > > > > >>=20 > > > > >> I have the feeling you are not explaining good enough what really > > > > >> is going on and it may help sending your configurations and an > > > > >> example of routes and IP addresses before and after this route > > > > >> change > > > > >=20 > > > > > Why is this so hard to understand? "Link down" leads to "static > > > > > route is deleted". This is standard FreeBSD behavior, and has been > > > > > this way for as long as I can remember (btw, I believe this > > > > > behavior is from the original BSD, not FreeBSD specific). > > > > >=20 > > > > > You can show this by having a static default route pointing to an > > > > > address on an Ethernet interface which has link. And then pulling > > > > > the TP cable from the Ethernet interface. Observe that the default > > > > > route is automatically removed. > > > >=20 > > > > may be you have not understood your own problem yet > > > >=20 > > > > because so far is nothing to be understood because none of your > > > > statements is correct, it is also not FreeBSD's standard behavior a= nd > > > > never has been > > > >=20 > > > > as long as there is the valid IP address on the related interface, = no > > > > static route will be deleted, you can even boot without cable and t= he > > > > [default] static route is there > > > >=20 > > > > so you need to explain better your problem in order to understand it > > > >=20 > > > > probably you have some other stuff running, thirdparty network > > > > manager or something, incorrect or incomplete ppoe or dhc > > > > configuration or whatever leads to the problem > > > >=20 > > > > FYI static routes usually are the manually configured routes, so wh= at > > > > you say is redundant and not correct, I guess you're loosing some > > > > kind of dynamic route > > > >=20 > > > > since WL networks usually do not run RIP/OSPF/BGP I guess the route > > > > you apparently loose is coming from some dhcp server and may be your > > > > dhclient configuration is incomplete or none existent, but here now > > > > it would be useful to see your config > > >=20 > > > Hi, > > >=20 > > > I think we need to distinguish between two matters. One is where the > > > route is directly reachable on the local-net of the network adapter, > > > and ARP is valid/responding. The second case is when the route is not > > > directly reachable. The second case is where the problem happens, like > > > Stian kindly explained. > > >=20 > > > # For example: > > >=20 > > > ifconfig wlan0 10.0.0.2 255.255.255.0 up > > >=20 > > > # Assume the router is at 10.0.0.1 > > > # And we want to reach a certain destination through 10.0.0.1 > > > # Then we do: > > >=20 > > > route add 10.22.1.1 10.0.0.1 > >=20 > > no no no my friend, wrong again > >=20 > > that is a static route and it goes away same way it was created, manual= ly > > or by deleting the IP address 10.0.0.2 from the related interface > >=20 > > wether there is or not an active link on that interface does not matter >=20 > Hi, >=20 > Can it be that dhclient which I'm running on this interface with manual > routes disrupts stuff then ?? >=20 so now we're coming to the point ... on renewal of the IP address the interface is set do down, old IP removed a= nd=20 the new one (even if the same as before) is associated and the IF comes up= =20 again means, any route associated get lost, you may get a new one (default) from = the=20 dhcp server you could set some options in your /etc/dhclient.conf to match your needs you could request a longer lease time, eventually reduce the retry time to = get=20 less down time check your log what the dhcp server send to you may be you try something like: timeout 60; retry 60; send dhcp-lease-time 36000; (or more to cover your longest up time) if the longer lease time does not work, then I guess then you could use th= e=20 'script "name"' option to set your special route after renewal Hans =2D-=20 HM +55 17 8111.3300 --nextPart4499585.QzosB4aL3A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAk/gMJ0ACgkQvKVfg5xjCDxPdgCbBKbueD3t8vMZgrIO2tA4811L xnkAoJ6POSri4yslvTyKvnztgTsigxbK =Fvl6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart4499585.QzosB4aL3A--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201206190456.13409.hm>