Subject: Re: should the default route get a new interface automatically?
To: NetBSD Networking Technical Discussion List <tech-net@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Martin Husemann <email@example.com>
Date: 07/28/2001 23:22:40
> > Since we don't have recursive route lookup, one could argue that the
> > ifconfig delete in step 3 should also have deleted the default route.
> Should it have deleted it, or just marked it as temporarily unavailable?
I suppose if you do "route delete default" and later (after the ifconfigs)
add it back (with the same static gateway address) all would be fine.
I'm not sure we need automatisms for such corner cases, although I've been
bitten by this too.