Re: In kernel routing table vs. /sbin/ip vs. /sbin/route

From: Martin Schewe (m@xsms.de)
Date: Sun Jan 06 2002 - 16:36:51 EST

Hi,

On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 12:23:50PM -0800, Dave Zarzycki wrote:
> Using /sbin/route, I can add multiple default routes like so:
>
> /sbin/route add -net default gw 192.168.0.1
> /sbin/route add -net default gw 192.168.0.2
>
> But I cannot do the same with /sbin/ip:
>
> /sbin/ip route add default via 192.168.0.1
> /sbin/ip route add default via 192.168.0.2
> RTNETLINK answers: File exists

$ /sbin/ip route append default via 192.168.0.2

> Given that /sbin/ip is the more powerful and modern tool, I'm lead to
> believe that /sbin/route might be leaving the in kernel routing table
> in a weird state.
>
> My two simple questions are as follows:
>
> 1) Which tool is more correct?

RFC1122 says having several _default_ routes is okay.

> 2) What is the behavior of the kernel when multiple default routes are
> defined?

The kernel will make dead gateway detection to select the right one for
you.

Regards,
                Martin


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:31 EST