On 15 May 2025, at 21:32, Marek Zarychta wrote: > W dniu 15.05.2025 o 20:59, Cy Schubert pisze: >> In message <20250515162552.9209b...@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
