On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 07:20:53PM +0300, Vladimir Grebenschikov wrote: > Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > > Any ideas what wrong with 'route change' ? > > > > > The route(8) manpage says: > > > > : In a change or add command where the destination and gateway are not suf- > > : ficient to specify the route (as in the ISO case where several interfaces > > : may have the same address), the -ifp or -ifa modifiers may be used to > > : determine the interface or interface address. > > > > So try this instead: > > > > route change 192.168.0/23 -ifp fxp0 > > Thank you, it works. > > So, as I understand, route add ... -iface fxp0 is invalid if I want > specify gateway interface ? > No, it's valid.
> (how this works, '-iface' flag and 'fxp0' is what ? gateway ?)
>
When the -iface keyword is present, the route(8) utility treats
the "gateway" argument specially, allowing it to be an interface
name, in which case the gateway address is passed as "struct
sockaddr_dl" denoting this interface. See the output of the
"route -v add" command. Hence, there's no a reason (other than
a kernel code bug) to prevent a "route change ... -iface fxp0"
command from working. Here's a fix:
%%%
Index: rtsock.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/net/rtsock.c,v
retrieving revision 1.120
diff -u -p -r1.120 rtsock.c
--- rtsock.c 7 Jan 2005 01:45:35 -0000 1.120
+++ rtsock.c 17 Jan 2005 22:01:47 -0000
@@ -491,8 +491,7 @@ route_output(struct mbuf *m, struct sock
* flags may also be different; ifp may be specified
* by ll sockaddr when protocol address is ambiguous
*/
- if (((rt->rt_flags & RTF_GATEWAY) &&
- info.rti_info[RTAX_GATEWAY] != NULL) ||
+ if (info.rti_info[RTAX_GATEWAY] != NULL ||
info.rti_info[RTAX_IFP] != NULL ||
(info.rti_info[RTAX_IFA] != NULL &&
!sa_equal(info.rti_info[RTAX_IFA],
%%%
Cheers,
--
Ruslan Ermilov
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD committer
pgpiND7qAZKs0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
