Re: epair(4)

From: Michael Butler <imb_at_protected-networks.net>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 20:08:00 UTC 
On 5/16/25 15:52, Lexi Winter wrote:

> i don't really want to add a kernel message here for something that only
> affects a small percentage of users, unlike net.add_addr_allfibs which
> affected everyone who uses multiple fibs.

That "small percentage" includes most folk currently using jails and/or 
bhyve (via sysutils/vm-bhyve).

If, as the bridge(4) man page suggests, the sysctl "goes away" in 16+, 
we'll need some other mechanism to interconnect these. It cannot simply 
"go away" without offering a solution. Any pointers?

	Michael