Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 26 Mar 2001 08:02:04 -0700
From:      Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>
To:        Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Indirect routes with indirect gateways, bugfix
Message-ID:  <3ABF59EC.68C80FF2@softweyr.com>
References:  <20010321133611.A62997@sunbay.com> <200103212116.QAA22097@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20010321133611.A62997@sunbay.com> <3AB8E7E2.36F360AA@softweyr.com> <20010322094429.B53063@sunbay.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> 
> I wrote:
> >
> > Unless someone has a good motivation for not doing this, I am going
> > to commit the attached patch that disallows indirect routes with
> > indirect gateways.
> >
> Okay, I will rephrase this.  Can you give me at least one example when
> adding an indirect route with indirect gateway will work?  If not, I
> strongly insist on excluding this code.

Certainly.  You add a route to a host on your corporate backbone via
a non-local router to guarantee that management accesses the accounting
servers via a path that does not traverse engineering.  Of course the
proper way to do this is with careful control of route tables or by
using VLANs, but that's not what many companies have.  Large networks
of routers and hubs are still commonplace, and this "hack" allows the
network administrator to create dedicated routes from one subnet to
another without requiring them to spread the routes across the entire
installation.

> On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 10:41:54AM -0700, Wes Peters wrote:
> > This allows a crude sort of "policy routing", if that is of any value.
> > I don't see what it hurts, or any reason to remove it.  A misconfigured
> > routing table is a system administration problem, not a code problem.
> 
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 04:16:21PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> > <<On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 13:36:11 +0200, Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> said:
> >
> > > The routing code (bogusly?) allows to add an indirect route with
> > > also indirect gateway.  This results in some nasty bugs:
> >
> > My sentiment is the same as Wes's.

-- 
            "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"

Wes Peters                                                         Softweyr LLC
wes@softweyr.com                                           http://softweyr.com/

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3ABF59EC.68C80FF2>