Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 10 Sep 2021 11:52:15 -0400
From:      mike tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
To:        Helge Oldach <freebsd@oldach.net>, Zhenlei Huang <zlei.huang@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: routing changes from Sept 7th and possible ppp breakage (RELENG_13)
Message-ID:  <24c853a3-bd84-58ac-e835-919f31b4d9ad@sentex.net>
In-Reply-To: <202109101534.18AFYarp001702@nuc.oldach.net>
References:  <202109101534.18AFYarp001702@nuc.oldach.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/10/2021 11:34 AM, Helge Oldach wrote:
> Zhenlei Huang wrote on Fri, 10 Sep 2021 10:34:20 +0200 (CEST):
>>> On Sep 10, 2021, at 5:38 AM, mike tancsa <mike@sentex.net> wrote:
>>> default            10.255.255.1       UGS         6   1500       igb0
>>> default            10.1.0.1           UGS        17   1500      tun10
>>>
>>> Where as now, it doesnt seem to replace it, it seems to just add
>>> another default route.
>> At first glance it seems that ppp does not check existing default
>> route before replacing it with a new one.
> My thinking as well. Similar thing (creating kind-of an overlay network)
> with openvpn results in a single default route - apparently the original
> one is properly removed before adding openvpn's own default route.
>
One other thing I noticed is that net.route.multipath is RO on i386 but
RW on AMD64.  Is that intentional for some reason ?

    ---Mike




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?24c853a3-bd84-58ac-e835-919f31b4d9ad>