Re: RTF_CLONING vs RTF_PRCLONING
From: Ruslan Ermilov (ru_at_freebsd.org)
Date: 07/29/03
- Previous message: Jason Hunt: "Re: Setting up a NAT Router that will route between 3 networks"
- In reply to: Garrett Wollman: "RTF_CLONING vs RTF_PRCLONING"
- Next in thread: Bruce M Simpson: "Re: RTF_CLONING vs RTF_PRCLONING"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 09:38:30 +0300 To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 05:51:28PM -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> <<On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 23:45:28 +0200, Vincent Jardin <vjardin@wanadoo.fr> said:
>
> > I agree, then... Isn't it already the purpose of RTF_CLONING ?
> > When should RTF_PRCLONIG be set ?
>
> RTF_PRCLONING is set automatically by the protocol to cause host
> routes to be generated on every unique lookup.
>
> RTF_CLONING is set when the route is added (either manually, or
> automatically for interface routes) to indicate that a more specific
> route (possibly a host route) needs to be generated on every unique
> lookup.
>
Yes, RTF_CLONING routes also accept the netmask (RTA_GENMASK).
I don't remember if it also applies to RTF_PRCLONING routes,
but I suspect so.
Cheers,
-- Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software Ltd, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Previous message: Jason Hunt: "Re: Setting up a NAT Router that will route between 3 networks"
- In reply to: Garrett Wollman: "RTF_CLONING vs RTF_PRCLONING"
- Next in thread: Bruce M Simpson: "Re: RTF_CLONING vs RTF_PRCLONING"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|