routing-policy should not requires from or to

[Jean-Daniel Dupas]

Actually, when trying to create a simple routing policy that unconditionality lookup a second routing tables,netplan fails with the error: IP routing policy must include either a 'from' or 'to' IP

This arbitrary limitation is cumbersome as it is perfectly valid to create 'ip rule' without any constraints but only a priority (actually it is even valid to create one without priority)

For instance, "ip rule add table 2 priority 1000" is a perfectly valid routing policy.

Note that this limitation can be workaround by using { from: '0.0.0.0/0' }, which should be the default IMHO.

[Daniel Axtens (daxtens)]

Hi,

I also ran across this and can confirm it.

Regards,
Daniel

[Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre (cyphermox)]

Could you describe the usefulness of such routing rules? It would help to define a test that will correctly let us verify this works when implemented.

Right now, it seems to me like there isn't much use in doing this as opposed to putting everything in the main table... It will be applied to all interfaces anyway.

I'm not saying "no", just trying to understand the requirement better.

[Stefan Magnus Landrø (slandro)]

I'm actually using firewall marking as the basis of my routing:

ip rule add fwmark 1 table 201
ip route add 10.x.y.z via 10.a.b.c dev eth0 table 201

An equivalent netplan doesn't validate right now. This should definitely be fixed.