John-Mark Gurney wrote: > LiuJiusheng wrote this message on Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 15:41 +0800: > >> Hello all: >> I have found something interesting in FreeBSD routing. This is a test >> environment, which is not used in reality(perhaps meaningless). >> >> | host |-------| router1 |----------| router2 | >> 2.2.2.2 2.2.2.1 6.6.6.1 6.6.6.2 X.X.X.X >> (All run FreeBSD OS) >> >> Two routes is added to the router1. (4.4.4.0/24 6.6.6.2) and >> (6.6.6.0/24 2.2.2.2).Then the routing table look this: >> Destination Gateway Flags Refs Use Netif >> Expire >> 2 link#3 UC 0 0 >> 2.2.2.1 00:0c:29:67:a5:88 UHLW 0 4 >> 2.2.2.2 00:09:6b:42:94:b7 UHLW 1 2 >> 1068 >> 4.4.4/24 6.6.6.2 UGS 0 38 >> 6 link#4 UC 0 0 >> 6.6.6/24 2.2.2.2 UGS 1 0 >> >> At this time, route 4.4.4.0 can not be used. When ping 4.4.4.4, the >> machine prints: sent to: Invalid argument. If I remove the route 6.6.6.0/24, >> then all become correct. >> > > You need to have the gateway for 4.4.4/24 be 2.2.2.2... The routing > code isn't smart enough to follow the trail through 6.6.6/24 to get to > 2.2.2.2.... > > Linux takes 6.6.6.2 as gateway for route 4.4.4/24. But some Oses have the gateway 2.2.2.2. (treat 4.4.4/24 as a recursive route). Is there any standard for this?
_______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
