Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 6 Jan 2002 22:36:51 +0100 | From | Martin Schewe <> | Subject | Re: In kernel routing table vs. /sbin/ip vs. /sbin/route |
| |
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 12:23:50PM -0800, Dave Zarzycki wrote: > Using /sbin/route, I can add multiple default routes like so: > > /sbin/route add -net default gw 192.168.0.1 > /sbin/route add -net default gw 192.168.0.2 > > But I cannot do the same with /sbin/ip: > > /sbin/ip route add default via 192.168.0.1 > /sbin/ip route add default via 192.168.0.2 > RTNETLINK answers: File exists
$ /sbin/ip route append default via 192.168.0.2
> Given that /sbin/ip is the more powerful and modern tool, I'm lead to > believe that /sbin/route might be leaving the in kernel routing table > in a weird state. > > My two simple questions are as follows: > > 1) Which tool is more correct?
RFC1122 says having several _default_ routes is okay.
> 2) What is the behavior of the kernel when multiple default routes are > defined?
The kernel will make dead gateway detection to select the right one for you.
Regards, Martin [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |