From nobody@FreeBSD.org  Thu Apr 11 11:18:49 2002
Return-Path: <nobody@FreeBSD.org>
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0500737B41C
	for <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 11:18:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from nobody@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g3BIImM07871;
	Thu, 11 Apr 2002 11:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from nobody)
Message-Id: <200204111818.g3BIImM07871@freefall.freebsd.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 11:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Harsha Bellur <h_bellur@yahoo.com>
To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: 2 Default Routes Created
X-Send-Pr-Version: www-1.0

>Number:         36999
>Category:       misc
>Synopsis:       2 Default Routes Created
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       high
>Responsible:    freebsd-bugs
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Apr 11 11:20:01 PDT 2002
>Closed-Date:    Fri Jun 18 01:18:57 GMT 2004
>Last-Modified:  Fri Jun 18 01:18:57 GMT 2004
>Originator:     Harsha Bellur
>Release:        4.5.0
>Organization:
>Environment:
FreeBsd Ported Stack ported for RTEMS os   
>Description:
I am running a node in the 172.16.9.x subnet with the default gateway as 172.16.9.1. However, when the node comes up it shows 2 Default routes.
The first one is the address of another node (say 172.16.9.36) in the 172.16.9.x network and the second one is that of the configured gateway (171.16.9.1).

I cannot delete the spurious default route (172.16.9.36) as "ROUTE DELETE" gives an error message saying 0.0.0.0 is not in table. However, I can delete the configured default gateway as expected.

Has anyone encountered such a problem before? Any Ideas?
>How-To-Repeat:
      
>Fix:
      
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: bms 
State-Changed-When: Fri Jun 18 01:18:27 GMT 2004 
State-Changed-Why:  
Not directly applicable to FreeBSD as it stands now; not enough 
information to investigate the problem. 

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=36999 
>Unformatted:
