> From: Shawn Iverson [mailto:shawn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 8:29 AM > > > > > /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/route-<interface-name> > > Contains lines that are arguments to "/sbin/ip route add" > For example: > > 192.168.2.0/24 dev ppp0 > > adds a network route to the 192.168.2.0 network through ppp0. > > > So, I would have the following in route-eth0: > > 10.0.0.0/8 via 10.10.0.254 dev eth0 (I have many 10.x.0.0 > subnets) > 192.168.0.0/16 via 10.10.0.254 dev eth0 (I have more > than one 192.168.x.0 > subnet) > > Ok, maybe my routes above are too simple because I don't want > 10.10.0.0/16 > traffic to try to exit via the 10.10.0.254 gateway. Would I > necessarily > need to make a route for every subnet on my network (20 > subnets), or could I > just add the following before the above two, assuming that > the routing table > is read from the top downward? (Thank goodness I didn't set > up the routers > for this network...I would have everything messed up!) > > 10.10.0.0/16 dev eth0 > I went ahead and tried my route settings above. It appears to be working like it should. I was able to ping objects on local and remote subnets. Also, traceroute shows packets traversing the correct paths. Is this a valid/accepted way to route my traffic? 172.16.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 10.10.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1 192.168.0.0 10.10.0.254 255.255.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 10.0.0.0 10.10.0.254 255.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0 127.0.0.0 * 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo default 172.16.1.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth1
