Unexpected behavior of static routes

[Alexander Demenshin]

On 2017-05-10 03:01, Ondrej Zajicek wrote:

> It is expected behavior. It is not optimal, but it is how it works.

Is it limitation by design or just "not implemented"?

> If you have a recursive route that is resolved to a device route,
> then the original gateway is kept.

Yes, indeed, this works (to my surprise), though it starts to produce
"Received route with strange next-hop" errors on every scan (harmless,
but too noisy and incorrect - there is nothing "strange" with that 
next-hop).

It does not look clean though - while it works, it looks not "natural"
in configuration ("recursive" instead of "via").

Would it not be an option to implement "onlink" static routes,
i.e. including both device and gateway addresses, or there are arguments
against this?

> If you do not want to assign a real address to the iface,
> then you could use ptp address like:

This is even less clean, to be honest.

---
With best regards,
Alexander.