Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 09:44:29 +0200 From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Indirect routes with indirect gateways, bugfix Message-ID: <20010322094429.B53063@sunbay.com> In-Reply-To: <3AB8E7E2.36F360AA@softweyr.com>; from wes@softweyr.com on Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 10:41:54AM -0700 References: <20010321133611.A62997@sunbay.com> <200103212116.QAA22097@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20010321133611.A62997@sunbay.com> <3AB8E7E2.36F360AA@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. 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. Thanks, -- Ruslan Ermilov Oracle Developer/DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age 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?20010322094429.B53063>