Re: Unexpected behavior of static routes

2017-08-10 Thread Damien Clabaut
Thank you very much, I confirm this solution works. Regards, On 09/08/17 05:46 PM, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 02:41:32PM -0400, Damien Clabaut wrote: Hello everyone, I am reopening the subject as I am facing the same issue that was described here. I add routes in Linux:

Re: Unexpected behavior of static routes

2017-05-10 Thread Alexander Demenshin
On 2017-05-10 13:16, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: But such design would bring plenty of issues w.r.t. multiple routing tables - may next hops resolve just in the same routing table or also in another routing table? Well, at least in Linux device/direct routes may exist in any table, so where is

Re: Unexpected behavior of static routes

2017-05-10 Thread Alexander Demenshin
On 2017-05-10 03:01, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: It is expected behavior. It is not optimal, but it is how it works. Is it limitation by design or just "not implemented"? If you have a recursive route that is resolved to a device route, then the original gateway is kept. Yes, indeed, this works

Re: Unexpected behavior of static routes

2017-05-09 Thread Ondrej Zajicek
On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 06:39:04PM +0200, Alexander Demenshin wrote: > Hi, > > I have something like this in my config (bird 1.6.3 @linux): > > protocol static { > route 10.1.0.0/24 via "eth1"; > route 10.2.0.0/24 via 10.1.0.1; > } > > Route to 10.1.0.0/24 is installed as expected, but,

Re: Unexpected behavior of static routes

2017-05-09 Thread Michael McConnell
Right, what you are doing is something I do all day long. I’ve looked over my configs and the only thing I can see that might be missing related to kernel. protocol kernel { export all; Sorry I’m not more help, but I can tell you that is definitely not the expected behaviour. Mike --

Re: Unexpected behavior of static routes

2017-05-09 Thread Alexander Demenshin
On 2017-05-09 20:18, Michael McConnell wrote: You have a physical interface (e.g. eth0) with an address assigned to the 10.1.0.1/24 on the system? No, I don't - this is exactly the problem. It has a completely different address in different network, and I do not want a router to have an

Re: Unexpected behavior of static routes

2017-05-09 Thread Michael McConnell
Alexander, You have a physical interface (e.g. eth0) with an address assigned to the 10.1.0.1/24 on the system? You shouldn’t need an address in the 10.2.0.0/24 subnet assigned to an interface. Cheers Mike -- Michael McConnell WINK Streaming; email: mich...@winkstreaming.com

Unexpected behavior of static routes

2017-05-09 Thread Alexander Demenshin
Hi, I have something like this in my config (bird 1.6.3 @linux): protocol static { route 10.1.0.0/24 via "eth1"; route 10.2.0.0/24 via 10.1.0.1; } Route to 10.1.0.0/24 is installed as expected, but, route to 10.2.0.0/24 is not showing up anywhere, while it seems logical that once its