netdev - Re: Q: bad routing table cache entries

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 29 Dec 2015 20:40:34 +0300
From:	Stas Sergeev <stsp@...t.ru>
To:	Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Q: bad routing table cache entries

29.12.2015 18:38, Stas Sergeev пишет:
> Likely the router's side is doing the right thing, but of
Or maybe not?
Here's the ifconfig of router:

eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:1e:8c:a7:b5:36
          inet addr:192.168.0.220  Bcast:192.168.3.255  Mask:255.255.252.0

eth0:1    Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:1e:8c:a7:b5:36
          inet addr:192.168.8.1  Bcast:192.168.11.255  Mask:255.255.252.0


# route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
default         192.168.0.1     0.0.0.0         UG    0      0        0 eth0
10.1.10.0       192.168.10.143  255.255.255.0   UG    0      0        0 eth0
localnet        *               255.255.252.0   U     0      0        0 eth0
192.168.8.0     *               255.255.252.0   U     0      0        0 eth0


Masks look correct.
So why would it send redirects to hosts of 192.168.8.0 subnet
with the gateway of 192.168.0.0 subnet?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html