Bug 132252 - Request for addition of routing rule config file
Request for addition of routing rule config file
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: initscripts (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Bill Nottingham
Brock Organ
: FutureFeature
Depends On:
Blocks: FC5Target 181711
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2004-09-10 06:28 EDT by Steven Whitehouse
Modified: 2014-03-16 22:48 EDT (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version: 8.36-1
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2006-07-21 14:25:08 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Example ifup-rules file (641 bytes, text/plain)
2005-02-02 05:04 EST, Steven Whitehouse
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description Steven Whitehouse 2004-09-10 06:28:26 EDT
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040114

Description of problem:
There is apparently no way to configure routing rules without
modifying the actual initscripts themselves. It would be useful if
there was
a per-interface set of rules (like the route-nnn files) but for
routing rules.

I suppose that there is some argument that it might be simpler/better
to just have a single global file for the rules and save/restore it
similarly to iptables rules as an alternative.

I can live with either solution, but I suggest the first one purely on
the selfish grounds that it happens to suit my needs better at this
particular moment in time :-)

The reason for the request is to make network configuration for
multiple providers easier, but I'm sure that other users of advanced
will find it useful too.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
N/A Enhancement request    

Additional info:
Comment 1 Bill Nottingham 2004-09-10 12:34:16 EDT
Got an example?
Comment 2 Steven Whitehouse 2004-09-10 13:05:35 EDT
My example looks like this:

[root@chywoon network-scripts]# /sbin/ip rule
0:      from all lookup local
32765:  from lookup bogons
32766:  from all lookup main
32767:  from all lookup default

[root@chywoon network-scripts]# /sbin/ip route show table main dev eth0  proto kernel  scope link  src dev eth0  scope link
default  proto kernel
        nexthop via  dev eth0 weight 1
        nexthop via  dev eth0 weight 1
        nexthop via  dev eth0 weight 1

[root@chywoon network-scripts]# /sbin/ip route show table bogons dev eth0  scope link dev eth0  scope link dev lo  scope link
default via dev eth0

[root@chywoon network-scripts]# /sbin/ip route show table diogel dev eth0  scope link dev lo  scope link
default via dev eth0

its incomplete... when I get my IP allocation from diogel, it
will have an extra rule, plus an extra route in the diogel
table to match whats already there for bogons.

The situation is a web server with several virtual hosts some of
which are accessible through one gateway to a certain provider
and some of which are accessible through a different gateway to
a different provider. In each case the IPs depend upon the providers
and I plan to pair them off such that there will be one IP per
provider for each virtual host and use DNS load balancing
between them.

I also expect to be expanding this system in the future to have
further providers attached to it, hence more rules. I may also
want to use separate physical interfaces for them as well at
some stage. Currently each provider connects through a separate
gateway box onto a local lan to which the web server is attached.
There is a further example in the Linux Advanced Routing HOWTO
where the providers are on different interfaces (see the url:

I can currently do everything with the standard config files except
the adding of the rules.
Comment 3 Steven Whitehouse 2005-02-02 05:03:32 EST
Updating this to FC3 since its still outstanding, also attaching an
example of what the proposed ifup-rules script could look like. The
ifdown-rules script would be identical aside from swapping the add to
del in the ip rule command line. The scripts could be hooked into
ifup-post and ifdown-post at a suitable point (which is what I've done
on my system).

Comment 4 Steven Whitehouse 2005-02-02 05:04:50 EST
Created attachment 110546 [details]
Example ifup-rules file
Comment 5 Miloslav Trmač 2006-07-10 18:11:18 EDT
Support for rule-$device added in CVS.
Comment 6 Bill Nottingham 2006-07-21 14:25:08 EDT
Built as 8.36-1.

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