Re: Multiple link, policy routing and link not in defaut route...

Marco Gaiarin <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Why the interface need to be in 'default route'? Thanks.
>
>As sugested by a private reply, i've disabled 'rp_filter' and packet
>flow correctly.
>
>AFAI've understood, packet get routed correctly to the intended
>interface, but when reply come back the reverse path filter interpret
>it as 'impossible' (because there's no a forward route, and this is
>true indeed), and filter it away.
>
>
>There's some 'smarter' way, or fine-grained way, or i have to disable
>rp_filter as the only option?

	Another possibility is that, because you're using fwmark in the
routing, you're running afoul of the src_valid_mark sysctl.

	By default (src_valid_mark = 0), fwmark is not checked when
performing rp_filter reverse path route lookups.  Enabling
net.ipv4.conf.*.src_valid_mark will cause the fwmark to be utilized for
the reverse path lookup.

	-J

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, [email protected]