Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 11:51:29 +0300 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Indirect route with also indirect gateway (was: Re: fastforwarding?) Message-ID: <20010702115129.A67459@sunbay.com> In-Reply-To: <3B3F930C.320CC3DC@softweyr.com>; from wes@softweyr.com on Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 03:15:56PM -0600 References: <GPEOJKGHAMKFIOMAGMDICEOJDGAA.deepak@ai.net> <20010626093545.D49992@sunbay.com> <3B3AB4F8.184A2EFE@softweyr.com> <xzp1yo4wdjh.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20010629112757.F91115@sunbay.com> <3B3F930C.320CC3DC@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 03:15:56PM -0600, Wes Peters wrote:
> Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> >
> > BTW, Wes, I'm still waiting for a working example of an indirect route
> > with also indirect gateway.
>
> Any indirect route via the opposite end of a point-to-point connection.
> Right?
>
You probably meant that the gateway is accessible via the opposite end.
But the gateway value on a P2P link is a no-op. Whatever gateway you
specify, the actual gateway is always the "opposite end". Here, the
gateway only helps the routing code to select the right interface.
I.e., on a 1.1.1.1 -> 2.2.2.2 configured tun0 interface, the following
two commands are equivalent:
route add -net 10 2.2.2.2
route add -net 10 -iface tun0
Funny though that you're giving this example, as it only works starting
with revision 1.62 (from June 4, 2001) of sys/net/route.c. Before this,
routing code incorrectly set up the interface based on destination, not
the gateway:
# ifconfig tun0
tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 1.1.1.1 --> 2.2.2.2 netmask 0xff000000
# netstat -rn
Routing tables
Internet:
Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire
default 192.168.4.65 UGSc 1 0 rl0
2.2.2.2 1.1.1.1 UH 0 0 tun0
3.3.3.3 tun0 UHS 1 0 tun0
127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 UH 1 6 lo0
192.168.4 link#1 UC 3 0 rl0 =>
192.168.4.65 0:d0:b7:16:9c:c6 UHLW 2 1576 rl0 899
192.168.4.115 0:c0:df:3:2d:79 UHLW 2 2 lo0
# route add -net 10 3.3.3.3
add net 10: gateway 3.3.3.3
# netstat -rn | grep 3.3.3.3
3.3.3.3 tun0 UHS 1 0 tun0
10 3.3.3.3 UGSc 0 0 rl0
^^^^ oops
I still think we should disallow such routes on non-P2P interfaces, at
least. What do you think?
Cheers,
--
Ruslan Ermilov Oracle Developer/DBA,
ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG,
ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine
http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010702115129.A67459>