Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Ханкин Константин
Date: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 - 11:22 pm

> IP addresses are owned by the "host" rather than specific interfaces
Well. Why routes are not in kernel table when interface is DOWN? And why 
routes are still alive if interface is UP, but not RUNNING?
I think it's right when I can't send anything through interface when there is 
no link. But now I have no link and a route to some network with the highest 
metric

--
Konstantin
E-mail homecreate@list.ru
Jabber homecreate@jabber.ru
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Ханкин Константин, (Wed Feb 18, 2:03 pm)
Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Stephen Hemminger, (Wed Feb 18, 5:04 pm)
Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Ханкин Константин, (Wed Feb 18, 11:22 pm)
Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Lennart Sorensen, (Fri Feb 20, 10:19 am)
Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Lennart Sorensen, (Mon Feb 23, 7:38 am)
Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Ханкин Константин, (Mon Feb 23, 11:02 am)
Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Lennart Sorensen, (Mon Feb 23, 2:14 pm)
Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Stephen Hemminger, (Mon Feb 23, 2:38 pm)
Re: Why linux keeps connected routes when link goes down, Lennart Sorensen, (Tue Feb 24, 11:52 am)