Routes not deleted after link down

[Phil Regnauld]

Michal Vanco (vanco) writes:
> On Sunday 19 June 2005 21:54, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote:
> > Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> > > My vote is that we should implement this functionality and make it
> > > switchable via sysctl. I'd leave the default as is.
> > >
> > > What is opinion of other networkers?
> >
> > How about also adding a sysctl for setting a delay time between event
> > and disabling of the route? Then even people with roaming wlan cards can
> > benefit.
> > Also it is in my opinion that the route be disabled (moved to a passive
> > route table maybe?) and not deleted.
> 
> This is what I meant initially. Marking route passive is better than just 
> deleting it and it'll be also faster to recall the route back in case of link 
> up.

	Deleting the route is definintely the most annoying thing you can
	do -- Linux does that, and that's no network reference (try and
	find RTF_STATIC in the Linux routing code).  Returning "Network
	unreachable" is the proper thing to do, but keep the route in the
	table...  Effectively removing the route from the forwarding
	table is a job for a routing demon.