From owner-freebsd-bugs  Thu Jun  8  1:30: 7 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D25537BF07
	for <freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Thu,  8 Jun 2000 01:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) id BAA21927;
	Thu, 8 Jun 2000 01:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org)
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 01:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200006080830.BAA21927@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Cc: 
From: William Carrel <william.a@carrel.org>
Subject: Re: kern/16318: Fix for wrong interface when adding new routes
Reply-To: William Carrel <william.a@carrel.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

The following reply was made to PR kern/16318; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: William Carrel <william.a@carrel.org>
To: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: kern/16318: Fix for wrong interface when adding new routes
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 01:28:31 -0700

 This problem still affects the FreeBSD kernel in 4.0 and 5.0.
 
 A patch file for 4.0-STABLE follows, I've tested this on 4.0-RELEASE and
 4.0-STABLE (incl. SMP for what it's worth).
 
 There is no difference between route.c at HEAD(5.0-current) and 
 RELENG_4(4.0-stable) so this patch should work effectively in both of
 the aforementioned.  And it does still fix my routing troubles.
 
 (and this time I sent the PR followup to a qualified name.)
 
 --- route.c.orig	Sat May 27 14:48:42 2000
 +++ route.c	Sat May 27 15:01:43 2000
 @@ -400,6 +400,9 @@
  	struct sockaddr	*dst, *gateway;
  {
  	register struct ifaddr *ifa;
 +	struct rtentry *rt;
 +
 +	ifa = 0;
  	if ((flags & RTF_GATEWAY) == 0) {
  		/*
  		 * If we are adding a route to an interface,
 @@ -408,7 +411,6 @@
  		 * as our clue to the interface.  Otherwise
  		 * we can use the local address.
  		 */
 -		ifa = 0;
  		if (flags & RTF_HOST) {
  			ifa = ifa_ifwithdstaddr(dst);
  		}
 @@ -425,18 +427,33 @@
  	if (ifa == 0)
  		ifa = ifa_ifwithnet(gateway);
  	if (ifa == 0) {
 -		struct rtentry *rt = rtalloc1(dst, 0, 0UL);
 -		if (rt == 0)
 -			return (0);
 -		rt->rt_refcnt--;
 -		if ((ifa = rt->rt_ifa) == 0)
 -			return (0);
 +		rt = rtalloc1(dst, 0, 0UL);
 +		if (rt) {
 +			rt->rt_refcnt--;
 +			if (rt->rt_ifa)
 +				ifa = rt->rt_ifa;
 +		}
  	}
 -	if (ifa->ifa_addr->sa_family != dst->sa_family) {
 +	if ((ifa) && (ifa->ifa_addr->sa_family != dst->sa_family)) {
  		struct ifaddr *oifa = ifa;
  		ifa = ifaof_ifpforaddr(dst, ifa->ifa_ifp);
  		if (ifa == 0)
  			ifa = oifa;
 +	}
 +	/* 
 +	 * If we are adding a gateway, it is quite
 +	 * possible that the routing table has a static
 +	 * entry in place for the gateway, that may
 +	 * not agree with the info from the interfaces.
 +	 * The routing table should carry more precedence
 +	 * than the interfaces in this matter.
 +	 * Must be careful not to stomp on new entries from 
 +	 * rtinit, hence (ifa->ifa_addr !=gateway).
 +	 */
 +	if ((ifa == 0 || ifa->ifa_addr != gateway) &&
 +			(rt = rtalloc1(gateway,0,0UL))) {
 +		rt->rt_refcnt--;
 +		ifa = rt->rt_ifa;
  	}
  	return (ifa);
  }
 
 ----- End forwarded message -----
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message