Why do you care? Unless you have emperical evidence that this is causing a problem, you are trying to control something that does not need to be controlled. You may have multiple routing tables but all get merged together in the OS's IP stack forwarding table. That is how the IP forwarding software of the IP stack is designed and that is where which interface is used to send a packet is determined. Any artificial manipulation that is done without the networking guys parallelling your manipulation will only create greater problems. The purpose of IP is to get packets from your host to another and the other hosts packets back to you. By use of routing protocols you are trying to ensure that continues even when something breaks. The routing protocols do this without your intervention. That is what their purpose in life are. Stay out of the way as much as possible and let the software do what it has been designed to do. KISS.
Asymmetric routing may seem unnatural to you (and the host may generate a message about it), but it is totally natural within the context of how routing works. If it happens, who cares as long as the packets get delivered. Remember, that is what IP and routing protocols are designed to do. Maybe the question is, how can these messages be turned off? If they can't, don't worry about them. They are happening because of the receipt of packets. That is being determined by the network routers, not you. At best, these messages are a warning of a possible problem IN THE NETWORK. We have yet to establish any actual problem exists (beyond the messages themselves). By definition, your host is part of "THE NETWORK." But, your only influence on the routers is through the routes you advertise. If you can't change that to get rid of the messages, you can't fix this. The network guys might be able to, but not you. Someone suggested that you provide some detailed information, IP addresses, subnet masks, routing tables. Now might be the time to do that. As I pointed out, however, how packets get to you is actually determined by the routers. The full picture of what is happening may require an understanding of the forwarding decisions being made by the the routers and hence, the routing tables in the routers themselves. Switch VLAN topologies can also come into play to cause confusion at Layer-3. Again, that is not something you can fix. Think of the messages as a pot hole in the road. Annoying. Not perfect. But, it doesn't actually stop traffic from getting where it needs to go. Would it be nice to fix? Yes, but not the end of the world. Harold Grovesteen Zach Pratt wrote:
I've done some further reading on the topic of asymmetrical routing, and I'm wondering if I should set up two routing tables (one for each interface). Any suggestions? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
