Thread (36 messages) 36 messages, 5 authors, 2016-01-13

Re: Q: bad routing table cache entries

From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hidden>
Date: 2016-01-12 17:26:26

On 12.01.2016 18:18, Stas Sergeev wrote:
12.01.2016 20:06, Hannes Frederic Sowa пишет:
quoted
On 12.01.2016 17:56, Stas Sergeev wrote:
quoted
12.01.2016 19:42, Stas Sergeev пишет:
Also the rfc1620 you pointed, seems to be saying this:

                  A Redirect message SHOULD be silently discarded if the
                  new router address it specifies is not on the same
                  connected (sub-) net through which the Redirect arrived,
                  or if the source of the Redirect is not the current
                  first-hop router for the specified destination.

It seems, this is exactly the rule we were trying to find
during the thread. And it seems violated, either. Unless I am
mis-interpreting it, of course.
If you read on you will read that with shared_media this exact clause (the first of those) is not in effect any more.
OK. But how to get such a redirect to work, if (checked with
tcpdump) the packets do not even go to eth0, but to "lo"?
I don't know, the router must be on the same shared medium. I guess 
physical reconfiguration is required?

Aren't there arp request for the host on eth0?
And how to deal with the above quote from rfc1812?
quoted
I don't know why shared_media=1 is the default in Linux, this decision was made long before I joined here. Anyway, with shared_media=1 this is absolutely the required behavior.
Then it should work. How? :)
What should work? Sorry, I can't follow you. Everything looks fine to 
me. The default is shared_media, so servers send such redirects and 
client accept those. If it would be 0 the rfc1812 applies and should 
stop servers to send such redirects and clients to accept those.

Bye,
Hannes
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help