On 1/9/17 7:01 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 1:24 PM, David Ahern <d...@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote: >> Why not use the VRF capability then? create a VRF and assign the interface >> to it. End result is the same -- separate tables and the need to use a >> bind-to-device API to hit those routes. > > Requiring that VRFs for this creates additional complexity, because > each network now requires its own VRF. That means that the connection > manager must create the VRF before the interface comes up and receives > the RA. > > In some cases this might not be possible. For example, consider a tun > interface that's created by a different process such as a VPN client. > In this case the connection manager doesn't know the interface name, > and the VPN client doesn't know to create the VRF, so if the tun > interface gets an RA after the tun is created but
Have you looked at adding basic l3mdev capabilities to tun? in this case just l3mdev_fib_table needs be implemented. On interface create push down a table id and set the IFF_L3MDEV_MASTER flag.
