Hi,

I appreciate the thought, but I think the implementation might be very confusing.

I think the patch could be improved by:

* Removing the 220 number and simply call it “IPsec VPN Routing Table”

* Not show the box when the table is empty which it will be for all users that are not using IPsec

And since it is basically a static table, I do not see what there is to gain for the user from this. How can this help with debugging?

-Michael

> On 7 Mar 2020, at 18:46, Peter Müller <peter.mueller(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> 
> Since IPsec routing information do not show up in the normal routing
> table, also displaying the contents of table 220 on netother.cgi might
> be useful for debugging purposes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Müller <peter.mueller(a)ipfire.org>
> ---
> html/cgi-bin/netother.cgi | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/html/cgi-bin/netother.cgi b/html/cgi-bin/netother.cgi
> index dde1b603a..ac02b8148 100644
> --- a/html/cgi-bin/netother.cgi
> +++ b/html/cgi-bin/netother.cgi
> @@ -79,6 +79,12 @@ if ( $querry[0] =~ "fwhits"){
> 	print "<pre>$output</pre>\n";
> 	&Header::closebox();
> 
> +	&Header::openbox('100%', 'left', "$Lang::tr{'routing table entries'} 220");
> +	$output = `/sbin/ip route list table 220`;
> +	$output = &Header::cleanhtml($output,"y");
> +	print "<pre>$output</pre>\n";
> +	&Header::closebox()
> +
> 	&Header::openbox('100%', 'left', $Lang::tr{'arp table entries'});
> 	$output = `/sbin/ip neigh show`;
> 	$output = &Header::cleanhtml($output,"y");
> -- 
> 2.16.4