From: John P. Eisenmenger (jpe_at_eisenmenger.org)
Date: Wed 20 Nov 2002 - 15:29:07 GMT
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Lars Braeuer wrote:
> I heared from someone else (the programer of heartbeat), that this
> doesn't happen on his suse 7.3/8.0 boxes.
I for one don't believe it.
An interface with no associated route in the routing table is useless,
except under special circumstances. A routing table entry is necessary
for the system to select the proper interface (or next hop) for
transmission. Ifconfig adds the routing entry on all UNIX platforms with
which I've dealt (SunOS, Solaris, AIX, HP/UX, BSD, and Linux). If you
really don't want the route to be added, then you need to remove the route
after performing the ifconfig.
Now if the assigned IP/netmask combines into a network that is already in
the routing table, then the route might not be added. Perhaps this is the
scenario being seen by the heartbeat developer.
> is anyone else of you experiencing the same.
> does anyone happen to know if this a kernel related problem?
Well, I kind of object to this being called a problem. It is how things
have worked for a long time in many implementations. A route table entry
is necessary for the system to know where to send packets destined for (in
your example) the 10.0.0.x network.
Perhaps if I understood what exactly you were trying to do...
-- John P. Eisenmenger jpe_at_eisenmenger.org