Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:52:07 -0600 From: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> To: Will Andrews <will@firepipe.net> Cc: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@freebsd.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Hiroki Sato <hrs@freebsd.org>, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: CFR: FIB handling improvements Message-ID: <CAOtMX2gKKP9s7mH_SK_xPGox1_6qg87SoOYQ3LvWhz-Oq3gjyg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Will Andrews <will@firepipe.net> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Hiroki Sato <hrs@freebsd.org> wrote: > > wi> * Always add loopback routes for non-zero FIBs, for both IPv4 and > > wi> IPv6. Arguably, this could be a policy issue, but it is currently > > wi> less-than-trivial to specify (in rc.conf) that a route needs to be > > wi> applied to every FIB. > > > > I am not sure why this is needed. Are the loopback host routes > > installed into all of the FIBs automatically when lo0 is initialized? > > > > Even if it is required, get_fibmod() is not necessary. The following > > should work: > > > > # route add -inet 127.0.0.1/8 -iface lo0 -fib all > > Other places in rc.d/routing can make use of 'all' in that case. > > No, loopback host routes are not installed into all FIBs, only FIB 0. > This is with rt_add_addr_allfibs == 0 (see rtinit1()), which probably > explains why. We could add an override for lo0 addresses, but perhaps > this is something that should be configurable? i.e. allow the > administrator to specify in rc.conf which FIBs lo0's host route should > be placed on? > When would you ever want lo0 to be inaccessible from some fibs? I can't think of any reasons. > > --Will. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOtMX2gKKP9s7mH_SK_xPGox1_6qg87SoOYQ3LvWhz-Oq3gjyg>