Re: [44net] Strange Broadcasts...

Well, I think it is much better (at least, cleaner) to have a single IPIP interface (P2MP) and have a route table (separate or merged with the main table) updated by a routing protocol. What you have made will work, but requires frequent downloading of a file and patching of the configuration to process changes. I did that before on Linux, but after having installed ampr-ripd I would not want to go back to that method... About routes: in Linux it is possible to have routes bound to an interface that has a broadcast nature (e.g. ethernet) and with a gateway that is outside the subnet served by the system itself. So you can partition a subnet and still have only a single gateway. This can be useful on ham networks where everyone in a local area has a Point-to-Point link to a node, and everyone routes to others via the node, but the node does not have an address in each subnet. RouterOS cannot handle this, but Linux can. E.g.: node has subnet 44.137.40.0/23 and has address 44.137.41.254 user has subnet 44.137.41.96/28 and has address 44.137.41.110 on eth0 then: ip route add 44.0.0.0/8 dev eth0 gw 44.137.41.254 onlink To do this in RouterOS (and in many other routers) you need to set the subnet mask to /23 on the eth0, but that means it will try to contact the others directly, not routing via the node. This will work when the local area is switching/bridging. Otherwise you will need to have a node address in everyone's subnet. The same situation occurs when setting up the P2MP IPIP tunnel interface: you assign it the subnet of your local system, so all the routes are outside the interface's subnet and need the "dev" and "onlink" parameters. RouterOS does not support them. But Linux does. Rob