routing tables on two NICs for network monitoring

[Shawn Iverson]

> From: Shawn Iverson [mailto:shawn at nccsc.k12.in.us]
> 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