From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jun 15 4:38:35 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from TK147108.tuwien.teleweb.at (TK147108.tuwien.teleweb.at [195.34.147.108]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21E5C37B5A3 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 04:38:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from satyr@TK147108.tuwien.teleweb.at) Received: from satyr by TK147108.tuwien.teleweb.at with local (Exim 2.12 #1) id 132YAR-0003PA-00 for hackers@freebsd.org; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 13:50:39 +0200 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 13:50:39 +0200 From: "Marinos J . Yannikos" To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: routing bug(?) persists (PR 16318) Message-ID: <20000615135039.F24505@TK147108.telekabel.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 3.4-STABLE still seems to contain the annoying routing bug that prevents the correct initialization of a default route with the gateway being in a non-local network, i.e. like this: ifconfig_vr0="195.58.183.77 netmask 255.255.255.248" static_routes="0 1" route_0="-net 195.58.161.96 -netmask 255.255.255.240 -iface vr0" route_1="default 195.58.161.97" (the error message is "network unreachable" while the default route is being set) I have been using William Carrel's bugfix for several months without problems, but for some reason it isn't in the main source tree yet, so cvsup overwrites the patched net/route.c sometimes. Does the bugfix break something? If not, why isn't it in 3.4-STABLE yet? It is necessary for the above configuration (or isn't it? I couldn't find another way to treat this topology). Regards, -mjy -- ***==> Marinos J. Yannikos ***==> http://pobox.com/~mjy To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message