Re: Simplify bridge(4)

[Ryota Ozaki <ozaki-r%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Mouse <mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost> wrote:
>> [J]ust wondering if we are going to see vether(4) anytime soon.
>
> How would this vether differ from the existing tap?  Presumably I'm
> just missing something....

dhcpcd didn't work well with bridge(4) and tap(4) didn't help that.
vether(4) would help that. We may be able to address the issue by
fixing bridge or tap but I have no idea for now.

>
>> This would simplify the administration and possibly the code of
>> bridge(4) in that bridge(4) would become strictly transit and not
>> have to worry about acting as both transit and endpoint.
>
> I don't see why bridge has to act as endpoint even now.  (I suspect
> this is due to whatever I'm missing that leads to my first question,
> above....)

Yes, NetBSD's bridge doesn't act as endpoint now and I don't have plan
to make it so.

Anyway vether would come to NetBSD in the near future, I guess :)

  ozaki-r