Re: IP4Config and routes

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 09:51 +0200, Simon Schampijer wrote:
> On 12/18/2009 03:14 PM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 14:22 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> What would you expect the routing table to look like in your case?  I
> >> suppose we could do a default route for link-local.  Not sure if that
> >> will confuse apps that expect a default route to mean an internet
> >> connection though.
> >
> > I would expect the subnet route, as NM is creating already:
> > 	dest=169.254.0.0
> > 	gateway=0.0.0.0
> > 	genmask=255.255.0.0
> >
> > I would also like the routing table to either include a default route:
> > 	dest=0.0.0
> > 	gateway=0.0.0.0
> > 	genmask=0.0.0.0
> >
> > or a multicast one:
> > 	dest=224.0.0.0
> > 	gateway=0.0.0.0
> > 	genmask=240.0.0.0
> >
> > The routing table that NM is setting up now is reasonable, in my
> > opinion, but there should be some way of customizing the behaviour in
> > the settings object.
> >
> > Daniel
> 
> Hi,
> 
> what is the status on this one? Was there a conclusion on whether NM 
> should set a default route for link local?

Creating a multicast route by default on link-local IPv4 connections
seems reasonable.  Want to do a patch for that?  I'd say just add the
desired route in aipd_get_ip4_config() in src/nm-device.c to the
returned NMIP4Config object and then lets make sure the code that adds
routes works correctly there.

Dan