24 May
2010
24 May
'10
10:55 p.m.
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:09:33PM -0700, Ken Restivo wrote:
If I bring up a local network, say:
$ sudo ifconfig eth0 192.168.42.177 up
The route to that 42 network is added to the routing
table:
$ route -n
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0
192.168.42.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
Again, assuming we're keeping it simple and dealing with non-overlapping netmasks, a
local route doesn't have to be added explicitly. Maybe that's what caused the
confusion.
What made me write the previous post was this excerpt from the
route manpage:
route add default gw mango-gw
adds a default route (which will be used if no other route matches). All packets
using this route will
be gatewayed through "mango-gw". The device which will actually be used
for that route depends on how we
can reach "mango-gw" - the static route to "mango-gw" will have
to be set up before.
which seems to imply that the existence of an interface does *not* imply
that packets for the corresponding network are routed to it. Nor, IMHO,
should it - you still may want to route some destinations on that network
via an other way, for whatever reason.
Ciao,
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !