On 13.12.2017 01:02, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >>> The whole maintain_loopback_route should be KILLED from the kernel, >>> it is simply the wrong thing to be doing. >> >> Only if you can supply alternative way to assign highest priority >> (administrative distance = 0) for "directly connected" routes. >> And ability to override dynamically received prefixes with direct >> interface address assignment. > > This is all done by correctly configured routing daemon > running in userland over the route socket.
Do we have such daemon maintaining directly connected routed in the base system? > Only being doing that for 25+ years that way, why suddenly does the > kernel need to over ride what has already been done and working? I cannot speak for 25+ years but I can for 17+ while there was NO way in FreeBSD to assign an address like 192.168.0.1/24 to an interface when such prefix already was installed to the kernel by routing daemon. Pinning loopback prefixes solved this problem at last. _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
