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