Right, I found the reason:

```

2024-04-22 04:05:59.569 <ERR> KRT: Received route 10.240.2.0/24 with strange next-hop 10.50.0.1
2024-04-22 04:05:59.569 <ERR> KRT: Received route 10.240.224.2/32 with strange next-hop 10.50.0.1

```

it happens because there is no "explicit" route to the next hop but the "device route". And in the current version of the OS I'm running `bird 2.15` that support specifying both next hop and device is not available yet. So I will be doomed to run it like that for another couple years.

Would it not hurt otherwise to run it? (assuming I can live with sub optimal `! (100/?)` output).

Thank you!

On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 at 14:47, Ivan Kurnosov <zerkms@zerkms.com> wrote:

Hi team,

can somebody please help interpret the following output:

```
10.50.0.1/32   unicast [static1 02:16:07.523] * (200)
dev xfrm-40
10.240.224.2/32   unicast [hq 02:27:17.417] ! (100/?) [AS65020i]
via 10.50.0.1 on xfrm-40
10.240.2.0/24   unicast [hq 02:27:17.417] ! (100/?) [AS65020i]
via 10.50.0.1 on xfrm-40
```

The current (birdc) machine establishes an ipsec tunnel and 10.50.0.1 is a firewall on the other side of the ipsec tunnel.

And kernel routes look like

```
10.50.0.1 dev xfrm-40 proto bird scope link src 10.80.1.76 metric 32
10.240.2.0/24 via 10.50.0.1 dev xfrm-40 proto bird metric 32
10.240.224.2 via 10.50.0.1 dev xfrm-40 proto bird metric 32
```

So, technically all works: packets flow as expected. It's only the `!` exclamation mark and `(100/?)` question mark that I cannot interpret.

Is it something I should worry about?

--
With best regards, Ivan Kurnosov