Is there a difference between the contents of the routing table and the routing cache immediately after the ICMP route redirect message?

What will be an ideal response?

```
[root@PC2 root]# ping -c 5 10.0.3.10
PING 10.0.3.10 (10.0.3.10) 56(84) bytes of data.
From 10.0.2.1: icmp_seq=1 Redirect Network(New nexthop: 10.0.2.2)
From 10.0.2.1: icmp_seq=2 Redirect Network(New nexthop: 10.0.2.2)
--- 10.0.3.10 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 4056ms

```
There is no change to the static routing table before and after the ICMP Redirect message.
However, there are changes to the routing cache of PC2, as shown below:
Before
```
: [root@PC2 root]# netstat -rn
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface
10.0.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
0.0.0.0 10.0.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
```
After :[root@PC2 root]# netstat -rn
```
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface
10.0.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
0.0.0.0 10.0.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
{/code/}
Before : [root@PC2 root]# route -C
```
Kernel IP routing cache
Source Destination Gateway Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
PC2 PC2 PC2 l 0 0 133 lo
PC2 PC2 PC2 l 0 0 63 lo
PC2 PC2 PC2 l 0 0 459 lo
```
After : [root@PC2 root]# route -C
```
Kernel IP routing cache
Source Destination Gateway Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
10.0.2.10 10.0.3.10 10.0.2.2 0 0 1 eth0
PC2 PC2 PC2 l 0 0 215 lo
10.0.2.10 10.0.3.10 10.0.2.2 0 0 4 eth0
PC2 PC2 PC2 l 0 0 103 lo
PC2 PC2 PC2 l 0 0 743 lo
10.0.2.1 10.0.2.10 10.0.2.10 il 0 0 1 lo
```
We can see that in the routing cache, it shows that some entries are added from 10.0.2.10 to
10.0.3.10 through gateway 10.0.2.2 via eth0 and from 10.0.2.1 to 10.0.2.10 through gateway
10.0.2.10 via loopback interface. Here, we see additional entries indicating that packets with PC2
as source and PC4 as destination should use gateway 10.0.2.2, which is Router2.