Bug 111895 - r-c-network does not seem to respect static routing on virtual interfaces
Summary: r-c-network does not seem to respect static routing on virtual interfaces
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3
Classification: Red Hat
Component: initscripts
Version: 3.0
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Bill Nottingham
QA Contact: Brock Organ
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2003-12-11 13:31 UTC by Sven Winnecke
Modified: 2014-03-17 02:40 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-09-20 20:26:53 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Sven Winnecke 2003-12-11 13:31:34 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624

Description of problem:
when adding static router through r-c-network'sGUI, they do not seem
to be respected

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
redhat-config-network-1.2.58-1

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. open redhat-config-network under X
2. click on 'Add' to add an ethernet interface, repeat steps as
necessary to get a virtaual interface (i.e. add an interface to an
already used physical device)
3. open said interface with 'Edit' to configure the routes
4. click on activate (or service network restart)
    

Actual Results:  [root@banana network-scripts]# route -n
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref   
Use Iface
192.168.154.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.128 U     0      0       
0 eth0
192.168.158.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.128 U     0      0       
0 eth0
57.20.0.0       192.168.154.1   255.255.0.0     UG    0      0       
0 eth0
169.254.0.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.0.0     U     0      0       
0 eth0
57.56.0.0       192.168.154.1   255.255.0.0     UG    0      0       
0 eth0
127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 lo
0.0.0.0         192.168.158.35  0.0.0.0         UG    0      0       
0 eth0


Expected Results:  a gateway in the routing table where we defined it.

(a manually configured routing table from another machine follows)
[root@orange root]# route -n
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref   
Use Iface
172.28.204.193  192.168.158.34  255.255.255.255 UGH   0      0       
0 eth0
192.168.154.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.128 U     0      0       
0 eth0
57.57.244.0     192.168.158.34  255.255.255.128 UG    0      0       
0 eth0
192.168.158.0   0.0.0.0         255.255.255.128 U     0      0       
0 eth0
57.56.0.0       192.168.154.1   255.255.255.0   UG    0      0       
0 eth0
57.20.0.0       192.168.154.1   255.255.0.0     UG    0      0       
0 eth0
169.254.0.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.0.0     U     0      0       
0 eth0
127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 lo
0.0.0.0         192.168.158.35  0.0.0.0         UG    1      0       
0 eth0


Additional info:

[root@banana network-scripts]# cat route-eth0:1
GATEWAY1=192.168.158.34
NETMASK1=255.255.255.255
ADDRESS1=172.28.204.193
GATEWAY0=192.168.158.34
NETMASK0=255.255.255.128
ADDRESS0=57.57.244.0

Comment 1 Harald Hoyer 2003-12-11 14:23:08 UTC
and the route-eth0:1 properly used by network restart?

Comment 2 Harald Hoyer 2003-12-11 14:24:15 UTC
sorry... 
and the route-eth0:1 is not properly used by network restart?

Comment 3 Sven Winnecke 2003-12-12 06:46:43 UTC
Exactly. All interfaces come up properly and the routes are set
correctly for the physical interface (eth0) but not for the virtual
interface (eth0:1). Setting the route manually "route add ..." works
fine however, so I assume it is not a general networking problem.

While playing with it I took the virtual interface down and back up
(ifdown eth0:1, then ifup eth0:1), and ifup brings these messages:

bash# ifup eth0:1
Cannot find device "eth0:1"
Cannot find device "eth0:1"
bash#

That's one line for each interface-dependant route (I tried to set
only one route and got only one of those messages).

Maybe the real problem is the "ip" tool that is called from within the
network scripts, at least the mentioned message text is to be found in
the /sbin/ip binary.

As long as the problem persists I will just use a little init script
with the necessary "route" commands. A fix would still be nice though.


Comment 4 Harald Hoyer 2003-12-17 08:22:05 UTC
ok, I'll reassign to the initscripts component...

Comment 5 Bill Nottingham 2005-09-20 20:26:53 UTC
This problem will be resolved in a future release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux;
tentatively, RHEL 5. Red Hat does not currently plan to provide a resolution for
this in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux update for currently deployed systems.

With the goal of minimizing risk of change for deployed systems, and in response
to customer and partner requirements, Red Hat takes a conservative approach when
evaluating changes for inclusion in maintenance updates for currently deployed
products. The primary objectives of update releases are to enable new hardware
platform support and to resolve critical defects. 




Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.