loki wrote: > Nope. Then it wouldn't set up a route. For instance I'm setting up > ifconfig.1.eth0 (SERVICE ipv4-static, ADDRESS 10.0.44.33/16) without a default gateway.
> Then in the next ifconfig.2.eth0 I want to setup a static route towards > 192.168.0.0/16 through a router which is on 10.0.5.5/16 I have to put > 10.0.5.5 as the gateway for this route > with SERVICE ipv4-static-route and TYPE network and ADDRESS > 192.168.0.0/16. > Because of the /sbin/ifup script it won't be > "ip r add 192.168.0.0/16 via 10.0.5.5 dev eth0" but it will be > "ip r add default via 10.0.5.5 dev eth0". > But 10.0.5.5 is not my default > gateway it's just a gateway for 192.168.0.0/16. > I could circumvent that by renaming the ifconfig file that has the > default gateway in it to be in the first place in the directory. The > script as it is now with default gateway in /sbin/ifup > will always put the very first GATEWAY that it comes accross as the > default gateway. In my opinion the part for default gateway should go > back to ipv4-static. I think I see what you mean. What happens if we add a new variable to the ifconfig script: STATIC_GATEWAY=10.0.5.5 and change GATEWAY to STATIC_GATEWAY in the ipv4-static-route script? A more intrusive change would be to change GATEWAY to DEFAULT_GATEWAY in all the other scripts, but I'd prefer not to do that. We could also add a small check to ensure both GATEWAY and STATIC_GATEWAY are not both defined. That would cause problems when using the ipv4-static-route script. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
