Subject: Re: should the default route get a new interface automatically?
To: NetBSD Networking Technical Discussion List <tech-net@NetBSD.ORG>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/28/2001 09:56:27
>> do you know what routing daemons are for? ;-)
>Ah, I don't think so -- especially not on simple multi-homed servers.
>We're not talking about anything really massively dynamic here -- just
>a way to avoid the obvious silly issues that the rest of the in-kernel
>networking code seems to quite happily work around....
amount of dynamism does not have anything to do with justification
for routing daemons. all you need to do is
- advertise routes (like just default) from two of your routers
- listen to them on your server (routed -q)
>An IP route should be just an IP route, not an interface route -- the
>interface tag in an ordinary IP route shouldn't have precedence. After
>all I didn't set the interface tag manually when I initially assigned
>the route -- it was learned dynamically. Fixing it currently involves
>having to do the very unobvious -- delete the route and then add it back
>again exactly as it was!
... above labor will be automated, completely.