From owner-freebsd-isdn Tue Apr 3 10:14:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-isdn@freebsd.org Received: from mout0.freenet.de (mout0.freenet.de [194.97.50.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB48337B722; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 10:14:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from netchild@leidinger.net) Received: from [194.97.50.138] (helo=mx0.freenet.de) by mout0.freenet.de with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 14kUNw-0002Do-00; Tue, 03 Apr 2001 19:14:28 +0200 Received: from a3b42.pppool.de ([213.6.59.66] helo=Magelan.Leidinger.net) by mx0.freenet.de with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 14kUNv-0001Ed-00; Tue, 03 Apr 2001 19:14:27 +0200 Received: from Leidinger.net (netchild@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Magelan.Leidinger.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f33HDIm04806; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 19:13:19 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from netchild@Leidinger.net) Message-Id: <200104031713.f33HDIm04806@Magelan.Leidinger.net> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 19:13:16 +0200 (CEST) From: Alexander Leidinger Subject: Re: Recent interface/routing changes breaks on-demand PPP (+sppp) To: ru@FreeBSD.org Cc: net@FreeBSD.org, isdn@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <20010403172347.A64216@sunbay.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 3 Apr, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 04:13:27PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >> On 2 Apr, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: >> >> > OK, we fixed the "ifconfig down" case already. The attached patch alters >> > inet routing code so that it does not delete routes with the "default" >> > source address of 0.0.0.0; ip_output() will take care of choosing the >> > right address. Please let me know if it works for you. >> >> I reverted your "#if 0" patch (which worked for me) and applied this >> patch: no, didn't works, the route vanishes. >> > Nope, you should not have been reverting the "#if 0" patch, you should > have used both. Oh, ok. > The "#if 0" patch, like you called it, fixed the case when the route > disappeared on ``ifconfig down''. Right? With only the "#if 0" patch, everything worked as bevore the commit. > If I understood you correctly, the route still disappeared after a > new IP address was negotiated with the peer. The last patch is a No. > special hack for routes with the "default" (0.0.0.0) address; the > routing code will not delete such routes. Or did I misunderstood > something, and negotiated IP address is added as an alias address > to an interface? How does the ``ifconfig'' output looks after > the IP address is negotiated? (If the new address is an alias > address, then the second patch is not required.) This is the output with only the second patch applied and a connection to my ISP: ---snip--- (10) root@ttyp2 # route -vn get default u: inet 0.0.0.0; u: inet 0.0.0.0; u: link ; RTM_GET: Report Metrics: len 168, pid: 0, seq 1, errno 0, flags: locks: inits: sockaddrs: default default route to: default destination: default mask: default interface: isp1 flags: recvpipe sendpipe ssthresh rtt,msec rttvar hopcount mtu expire 0 0 0 0 0 0 1500 0 locks: inits: sockaddrs: default isp1:0.0.0.0.0.0 default isp1:0.0.0.0.0.0 213.6.59.66 (11) root@ttyp2 # ifconfig isp1 isp1: flags=a051 mtu 1500 inet 213.6.59.66 --> 0.0.0.1 netmask 0xffff0000 ether 00:00:00:00:00:00 (13) root@ttyp2 # netstat -rn Routing tables Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif Expire default 0:0:0:0:0:0 USc 30 2 isp1 0.0.0.1 213.6.59.66 UH 0 0 isp1 0.0.0.2 0.0.0.0 UH 0 0 isp0 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 UH 2 14817 lo0 192.168.1 link#1 UC 0 0 ed0 => ---snip--- Bye, Alexander. -- Loose bits sink chips. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isdn" in the body of the message