[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: In kernel routing table vs. /sbin/ip vs. /sbin/route

On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 12:23:50PM -0800, Dave Zarzycki wrote:
> Using /sbin/route, I can add multiple default routes like so:
> /sbin/route add -net default gw
> /sbin/route add -net default gw
> But I cannot do the same with /sbin/ip:
> /sbin/ip route add default via
> /sbin/ip route add default via
> RTNETLINK answers: File exists

$ /sbin/ip route append default via

> Given that /sbin/ip is the more powerful and modern tool, I'm lead to
> believe that /sbin/route might be leaving the in kernel routing table
> in a weird state.
> My two simple questions are as follows:
> 1) Which tool is more correct?

RFC1122 says having several _default_ routes is okay.

> 2) What is the behavior of the kernel when multiple default routes are
> defined?

The kernel will make dead gateway detection to select the right one for

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:0.038 / U:2.832 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site