Andrew wrote: > > Hey, I'm working on the rules and routes to implement what I've been talking > about, and I've got a small question about the ip rule add. > > I'm trying to add a blackhole route, and ip rule add seems to insist that I > provide a lookup table with the route. > > For instance If I execute the command: > > "ip rule add from 0.0.0.0/0 type blackhole." > > when I look at what it did with "ip rule ls" I see > > "from all lookup main blackhole" > > The only way it seems to get rid of main in the example above is > to define a dummy table and re-add the route like so: > > "ip rule add from 0.0.0.0/0 lookup bit-bucket type blackhole." > > Then when I see what's done with "ip rule ls" it says: > > "from all lookup bit-bucket blackhole" > > I suppose that's OK. Just seems a bit stilted. Does it matter that the > bit-bucket table might not contain any routes? In the case of a blackhole route, > does the kernel even perform the table lookup? Would leaving the default main in > have been OK? > > -Andrew > > _______________________________________________ > LARTC mailing list / LARTC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://ds9a.nl/2.4Routing/ Why not use the "default" table? It's empty anyway, it just seems "right". Anyone know something about this I haven't thought of??
