> Simon J Mudd wrote in a message to Mike Bilow:
>
> SJM> This is I think correct. Initially I have no specific
> SJM> routing information to ax0 apart from the device
> SJM> configuration above, but this is sufficient to route access
> SJM> to all hosts on the 44.133.228/26 network.
>
> SJM> However another host on the same network, ea4rct, using rspf
> SJM> is broadcasting a route to THIS network on the same
> SJM> frequency. Here I am unclear whether this is correct,
> SJM> tolerated or not. The end result is my rspf daemon notes
> SJM> this information and adds a dynamic route to 44.133.228.0/26
> SJM> through ea4rct.
>
> What should be happening is that you should have a locally established route
> with a lower cost (more preferred) metric, and your rspfd should therefore
> decline to make use of the announced route from your neighbor. However, it
> is legal for your rspfd to "remember" the existence of the annouced route
> in case
> its lower cost route becomes unavailable: this is the whole point of RSPF.
> Exactly how this is implemented, especially in your situation where there is
> only an implied route in the first place, is a question I will leave to
> Craig.
Thanks Mike for your prompt answer. perhaps you know how other daemons work,
such as routed, which is often used in similar situations, but with obviously
faster more reliable networks?
This is something Julian, who has configured ea4rct, has pointed out, and
he suggested that maybe this is a bug in the linux kernel routing algorithm.
This sounds worrying, and a glaring mistake like this should have been found
and corrected a long time ago. That or something else is happening.
I didn't think it was necessary to specifically name a route to the hosts on
a network interface, as this is implicit in the device's configuration
parameters, but maybe this is something which must be done if dynamic routing
is used.
I guess I'll have to wait and see what Craig says, and check whether the
problem is "his", ours (bad configuration), or a wider kernel problem (which
I would think is unlikely).
-- regards,Simon J Mudd, Madrid SPAIN +34-1-559 2854 e-mail: teieeff.zokooad@kerailya.tunkki.fi [short messages - from radio hams] ----> sbjddhf@limmared.com