Re: epair(4)

W dniu 16.05.2025 o 22:38, Kristof Provost pisze:
> On 15 May 2025, at 21:32, Marek Zarychta wrote:
>> W dniu 15.05.2025 o 20:59, Cy Schubert pisze:
>>> In message <20250515162552.9209B20E@slippy.cwsent.com>, Cy Schubert writes:
>>>> Over the last couple of days epair(4) fails to set up when an IP address is
>>>> specified.
>>>>
>>>> bob# service jail onestart test2
>>>> Starting jails: cannot start jail  "test2":
>>>> epair0a
>>>> ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): Invalid argument
>>>> jail: test2: /sbin/ifconfig epair0a inet 10.1.1.70 netmask 0xffffff00 up:
>>>> failed
>>>> .
>>>> bob# ifconfig epair0a inet 10.1.1.70 netmask 0xffffff00
>>>> ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): Invalid argument
>>>> bob# ifconfig epair0a inet up
>>>> bob#
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> This regression is caused by b61850c4e6f6.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, it requires at least head up, similar to old one, known from fibs :
>>
>> WARNING: Configuring address on bridge(4) member has been turned off by default. Consider tuning  net.link.bridge.member_ifaddrs if needed.
>>
> The error message should not suggest changing the sysctl. This is a configuration error and will lead to subtle and unexpected problems.
>
> The intent is for the sysctl to go away and for this to be entirely disallowed, without a way to bypass the check in 16.0.
>
> As Lexi pointed out in another e-mail: users should assign addresses to the bridge, never to bridge member interfaces.
>
> —
> Kristof
>
Thanks for the statement. Some may consider this a POLA violation. If 
you insist on removing the sysctl, it will require additional work to 
update all existing vm-bhyve and jail setups before upgrading to 
16.0-RELEASE, whenever it is released.

Cheers

-- 
Marek