Re: late 6.1 question ( arp , table , routing )

2017-09-14 Thread sven falempin
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 18:41 -0400, sven falempin wrote: > > Feels like it s impossible to use virtual routing table without a > rdomain > > on interface with 6.1 > > > > I think you were relying on an arp(1) bug that influenced your > un

Re: late 6.1 question ( arp , table , routing )

2017-09-13 Thread Mike Belopuhov
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 18:41 -0400, sven falempin wrote: > Feels like it s impossible to use virtual routing table without a rdomain > on interface with 6.1 > I think you were relying on an arp(1) bug that influenced your understanding of routing tables and routing domains. To recap: 1. There c

late 6.1 question ( arp , table , routing )

2017-09-11 Thread sven falempin
Feels like it s impossible to use virtual routing table without a rdomain on interface with 6.1 # arp -V 122 -s 172.16.1.1 ac:64:dd:b0:00:03 [permanent] arp: writing to routing socket: No such process arp: 172.16.1.1: No such process Even if the routing can be modify with /sbin/route -T122 add