Re: route change addr -ifp foo behaviour

[David Young <dyoung%pobox.com@localhost>]

On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 12:16:49AM +0000, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 13:17 -0600, David Young wrote:
> > > route change 192.168.0.0/24 -ifp re1
> > 
> > Reach destination 192.168.0.0/24 through re1.
> 
> This is the case which I'm interested in.
> At this point it becomes a managed route, so whilst dropping the
> IFA_ROUTE flag is correct, we should not add it to the sockaddr_dl ifa.

The sockaddr_dl ifa?

> > > ifconfig re0 -alias 192.168.0.1 # connected route remains, ok
> > > ifconfig re1 -alias 192.168.0.2
> > > 
> > > Now, if the last route style command is used, the last ifconfig command
> > > will not remove the connected route. If the other two where used (ifa
> > > specified) then the connected route is removed.
> > 
> > I don't know what to make of that.  It would help if you
> > would send relevant 'route show' or 'netstat -rn -f inet'
> > output at each step, so that readers don't have to try to reproduce
> > these steps on their own.
> 
> Output for both is actually the same.

I think that you didn't understand what I am asking for.  How do
those commands change the routing table?  You've told us, but you
haven't shown us.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
dyoung%ojctech.com@localhost      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933