From nobody Thu May 22 00:14:52 2025 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4b2phQ3cH6z5wlyT for ; Thu, 22 May 2025 00:15:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from void@f-m.fm) Received: from fout-b3-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b3-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.146]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4b2phP1yvSz3jrw for ; Thu, 22 May 2025 00:15:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from void@f-m.fm) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=f-m.fm header.s=fm3 header.b=HcEeJC7m; dkim=pass header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm3 header.b=RSyhlZos; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of void@f-m.fm designates 202.12.124.146 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=void@f-m.fm; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=f-m.fm Received: from phl-compute-09.internal (phl-compute-09.phl.internal [10.202.2.49]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CAFD11404F2 for ; Wed, 21 May 2025 20:15:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-09.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 21 May 2025 20:15:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=f-m.fm; h=cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1747872900; x=1747959300; bh=7aA7aM6IwS mKnihZYMfeiR4Qrg16cE7dzOH1EdXddfA=; b=HcEeJC7mXckL7yIO1NTs/7D1sj lZ8mzARFhIs5e4J2s/dkfdcK0ChpCigo5d5EqOOa1SPArdMTMVY49yx08+U4aXJY oPr2/Hg2EPa4s8k7x3e2eZKuNBdaJRAbRC9h6pQH7wNd1fmMYyRD9DGmMRSRNQHf uKcXFuQ6MwdWY2+Ld5TeisyU2bVJ4msr62QxoJJvnBdvItA4mjGevbQ/lefyE/St BV1YY8ZsVUNZYFVU/Y682XcMVJw+qaazerEMT18UsXj4Vb812Qax4b1fu4LMnoDd FIQWSPzKfKyqCX7QewHF1oRdnouiRt9PE5bR91+udxXUaihadKSs7tglYrlA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1747872900; x=1747959300; bh=7aA7aM6IwSmKnihZYMfeiR4Qrg16cE7dzOH 1EdXddfA=; b=RSyhlZosCT7F/5g0YJKQ7r/glvciAn5vHVNbqCjSN9bbAmh61w5 kb0tKcJjP7pGsUC6fHYqALnl0M07Fasw+yqGNqZPwlxKRFAdk/AeQaZ4jOSOVnJm N/rRZalVQhDkPHh9ZKDV43S4uHPz15CtYEGkeGStL88Ypm6txiGnX4OmMMBYe+3W Vr4TYol3en0u5qu4G/72pPUlx2P4/pY4gKEA597AN4Ghg8uxg4Vcuyp4SYeU66SR Dhwxaem/+Q2lFz/Y4Zw8R3VvYzXDVVWyFU/j63sAmXQmORJm6iwA2bNhK9e9xkXT 888aaoNLW8gP9bMf5R1S6wzgglaqQhai0ng== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtddtgdeggeelucdltddurdegfedvrddttd dmucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgf nhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttd enucenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvhho ihguuceovhhoihgusehfqdhmrdhfmheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepkeduffeijeeule ethfelleektdeuheektdefgfdvvefgtdevuedtieffgfeigeehnecuffhomhgrihhnpegr rhgthhhivhgvrdhorhhgpdhfrhgvvggsshgurdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepvhhoihgusehfqdhmrdhfmhdpnhgspghr tghpthhtohepuddpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepfhhrvggvsghsug dqtghurhhrvghnthesfhhrvggvsghsugdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i2541463c:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Wed, 21 May 2025 20:14:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 01:14:52 +0100 From: void To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: epair(4) Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20250515162552.9209B20E@slippy.cwsent.com> <20250515185919.87008219@slippy.cwsent.com> <45d0f49d-229b-46b4-af95-6e8c4c856661@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl> <932111f8-f5ca-46d1-9f66-983f80f6116b@protected-networks.net> List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4b2phP1yvSz3jrw X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.60 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.997]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[f-m.fm,none]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[f-m.fm:s=fm3,messagingengine.com:s=fm3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:202.12.124.128/27]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[202.12.124.146:from]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[f-m.fm]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[f-m.fm]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[f-m.fm:+,messagingengine.com:+]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[messagingengine.com:dkim] On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 09:21:29PM +0100, Lexi Winter wrote: >i am not sure about this. i admit i have not done a survey :-) however, >i believe most people using jails or bhyve are not affected. the >Handbook is clear about the correct way to configure this[0], so people >who followed the handbook to configure their jails or bhyve VMs should >not run into this problem. Your belief that most people using bhyve and jails would be unaffected is, I think, misplaced. The handbook has only been clear about the "correct way to configure" this since around the middle of last year [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20240725082825/https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/virtualization/ in 24.6.13 Prior to that, like https://web.archive.org/web/20240406173929/https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/virtualization/ in 24.6.10 or in https://web.archive.org/web/20210301113601/https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/virtualization/#virtualization-host-bhyve in 22.7.9 there's no mention of the now-correct way of configuring bridge in a bhyve context. Maybe it'd be an idea to have section 24.7.13 immediately following 24.7.1 in the (latest) handbook and also a note to make it clear that members of a bridge cannot, as just members, be individually assigned an ip. [1] relevant because typically bhyve hosts are high-uptime hosts. Conceivable that the network won't typically be thought to have to be reconfigured after an update/upgrade. --