Evening all, I posted this on another mailing list but I think there are a couple here that might be able to help. I am struggling to get the syntax right to add an equal-cost multi-path route under BSD and wondered if anyone out there could correct my mistake? I'm running FreeBSD 8.1 (actually its pfSense 2.0 Beta 4!). I have a virtual sand box on the go, I'm trying for something along the lines of:
route add -net 0.0.0.0/32 equalize nexthop via 192.168.0.1 nexthop via 192.168.0.2
With the intention of balancing per-packet across each of these gateways except I get this error instead:
route: writing to routing socket: Network is unreachable add net 0.0.0.0: gateway equalize: Network is unreachable
I'm rather tired, this stupid box has no man pages, so I stabbed again with:
route add -net 0.0.0.0/32 via 192.168.0.1 via 192.168.0.2 equalize route: bad address: via
Clearly my syntax is way out, but I'm tired and stuck for ideas. Anyone have clue to spare?
On 13 Dec 22:11, James Bensley wrote:
Evening all, I posted this on another mailing list but I think there are a couple here that might be able to help. I am struggling to get the syntax right to add an equal-cost multi-path route under BSD and wondered if anyone out there could correct my mistake? I'm running FreeBSD 8.1 (actually its pfSense 2.0 Beta 4!). I have a virtual sand box on the go, I'm trying for something along the lines of:
route add -net 0.0.0.0/32 equalize nexthop via 192.168.0.1 nexthop via 192.168.0.2
With the intention of balancing per-packet across each of these gateways except I get this error instead:
route: writing to routing socket: Network is unreachable add net 0.0.0.0: gateway equalize: Network is unreachable
I'm rather tired, this stupid box has no man pages, so I stabbed again with:
route add -net 0.0.0.0/32 via 192.168.0.1 via 192.168.0.2 equalize route: bad address: via
Is that supposed to be setting the default route?
Cos, 0.0.0.0/32 isn't going to match much... I don't know many machines with the IP of 0.0.0.0...
You might want to try: route add -net 0.0.0.0/0 equalize nexthop via 192.168.0.1 nexthop via 192.168.0.2
But I'm not entirely sure that's how BSD routing works... I haven't currently got a FreeBSD box to mess with.
Clearly my syntax is way out, but I'm tired and stuck for ideas. Anyone have clue to spare?
-- Regards, James.
http://www.jamesbensley.co.cc/
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; Those who understand Vigesimal, and J others...?
main@lists.alug.org.uk http://www.alug.org.uk/ http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main Unsubscribe? See message headers or the web site above!
I did indeed mean 0.0.0.0/0, I blame this entirely on my sleepiness :D
My BSD box is falling over on the "equalize" flag. I don't think its in there :(
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 14/12/2010 14:19, James Bensley wrote:
I did indeed mean 0.0.0.0/0, I blame this entirely on my sleepiness :D
My BSD box is falling over on the "equalize" flag. I don't think its in there :(
It doesn't seem to be according to the OS X "man route" (which is lifted directly from BSD, according to the page). Here's a snip:
<snip> ROUTE(8) BSD System Manager's Manual NAME route -- manually manipulate the routing tables
SYNOPSIS route [-dnqtv] command [[modifiers] args]
The route utility provides six commands:
add Add a route. flush Remove all routes. delete Delete a specific route. change Change aspects of a route (such as its gateway). get Lookup and display the route for a destination. monitor Continuously report any changes to the routing information base, routing lookup misses, or suspected network partitionings.
...
The other commands have the following syntax:
route [-n] command [-net | -host] [-ifscope boundif] destination gateway [netmask]
where destination is the destination host or network, gateway is the next-hop intermediary via which packets should be routed. Routes to a particular host may be distin- guished from those to a network by interpreting the Internet address specified as the destination argument. The optional modifiers - -net and -host force the destination to be interpreted as a network or a host, respectively. Otherwise, if the destination has a ``local address part'' of INADDR_ANY (0.0.0.0), or if the destination is the sym- bolic name of a network, then the route is assumed to be to a network; otherwise, it is presumed to be a route to a host. Optionally, the destination could also be speci- fied in the net/bits format.
</snip>
Maybe that'll help.
Simon
- -- ====================================================================== Simon Ransome http://nosher.net Photo RSS Feed: http://nosher.net/images/images.rss
-
Brett Parker -
James Bensley -
Simon Ransome