On 22 February 2016 at 07:05, Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> wrote: > On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 20:12:04 +1100 > Marcus Furlong <furlo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Just wondering if the following command should work: >> >> # ip route add 192.168.27.27/24 dev eth0 scope link src 192.168.27.27 >> RTNETLINK answers: Invalid argument >> >> However, this command works: >> >> # ip route add 192.168.27.0/24 dev eth0 scope link src 192.168.27.27 >> >> 192.168.27.0/24 and 192.168.27.27/24 describe the same subnet? >> > > It is the kernel complaining, not ip command. > The kernel will not accept 192.168.27.27/24 as route since it is a full > network address, not an network prefix.
Would it be a bad idea for the ip command to validate the data, and only submit the network bits to the kernel? Regards, Marcus. -- Marcus Furlong
