Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 20:28:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Flaschberger <if@xip.at> To: "Li, Qing" <qing.li@bluecoat.com> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: RE: funny ECMP Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1008242027390.12708@filebunker.xip.at> In-Reply-To: <B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A4307F1FF22@bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com> References: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1008230154280.29368@filebunker.xip.at> <alpine.LFD.2.00.1008240144350.12708@filebunker.xip.at> <B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A4307F1FC70@bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com> <alpine.LFD.2.00.1008240223240.12708@filebunker.xip.at> <alpine.LFD.2.00.1008242005160.12708@filebunker.xip.at> <B583FBF374231F4A89607B4D08578A4307F1FF22@bcs-mail03.internal.cacheflow.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dear Li,
> The indirect route is colliding with the interface route, both have
> the same mask.
>
> How do you expect this to work ?
>
> How would the routing code differentiate between on-link nodes and
> the those needing to be routed through 10.11.11.1 ?
in_lltable_rtcheck
if (rt == NULL || (!(flags & LLE_PUB) &&
((rt->rt_flags & RTF_GATEWAY) ||
(rt->rt_ifp != ifp)))) {
RTF_GATEWAY?
Kind regards,
Ingo Flaschberger
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LFD.2.00.1008242027390.12708>