From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <glas-sysadmins@m.gmane.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on sa.int.altlinux.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,
	SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: sysadmins@lists.altlinux.org
From: Anton Farygin <rider@altlinux.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 08:29:56 +0300
Message-ID: <hko7g5$6aq$2@ger.gmane.org>
References: <20100206231436.0cd8008b@msi.localdomain>	<hkm025$2hj$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<20100207102748.GB8733@altlinux.org>	<hkmpba$dte$2@ger.gmane.org>
	<20100207180722.GF8733@altlinux.org>	<hkn9es$u6r$2@ger.gmane.org>
	<20100207223918.GG8733@altlinux.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: rider.balabanovo.ru
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
	rv:1.9.1.5pre) Gecko/20091019 Thunderbird/3.0pre
In-Reply-To: <20100207223918.GG8733@altlinux.org>
Sender: news <news@ger.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [Sysadmins] wire vs. wireless
X-BeenThere: sysadmins@lists.altlinux.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: ALT Linux sysadmins' discussion <sysadmins@lists.altlinux.org>
List-Id: ALT Linux sysadmins' discussion <sysadmins.lists.altlinux.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.altlinux.org/mailman/options/sysadmins>,
	<mailto:sysadmins-request@lists.altlinux.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.altlinux.org/pipermail/sysadmins>
List-Post: <mailto:sysadmins@lists.altlinux.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sysadmins-request@lists.altlinux.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.altlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/sysadmins>,
	<mailto:sysadmins-request@lists.altlinux.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 05:30:09 -0000
Archived-At: <http://lore.altlinux.org/sysadmins/hko7g5$6aq$2@ger.gmane.org/>
List-Archive: <http://lore.altlinux.org/sysadmins/>

08.02.2010 01:39, Alexey I. Froloff пишет:
> On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 11:57:15PM +0300, Anton Farygin wrote:
>>>>>> Одинаковый IP на оба интерфейса решает такую проблему.
>>>>>> И пускай оба будут подняты.
>>>>> А с default route что делать?  dev там не меняется.
>>>> Пускай их будет два, с разными метриками.
>>> DHCP, однако.
>> Это не должно мешать, есть же хуки.
> Тогда показывай ;-)

/etc/dhcpcd.enter-hook

а дальше читаем документацию и пишем что-то вроде:

if [ "$interface" = "wlan0" ];then
         SSID=`wpa_cli status|grep "^ssid"|cut -f 2 -d "="`
     if [ "$SSID" = "myaccesspoint" ];then
         if [ "$reason" = "BOUND"  || "$reason" = "REBIND" ];then
             ip ro del default
             ip ro add default via 192.168.1.1 metric 50
             ip ro add 10.150.0.0/16 via 192.168.1.1
             ifup myvpntunnel
         fi
         if [ "$reason" = "RENEW" ];then
             ip ro del default via 192.168.1.1
         fi
fi