Hi Stephen
On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 6:36 AM Stephen Hemminger
<step...@networkplumber.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2024 20:38:51 +0300
> Isaac Boukris <ibouk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > + if (mac_pair) {
> > + struct rte_ether_addr *mac;
> > + mac = (struct rte_ether_addr*)ifr.ifr_hwaddr.sa_data;
> > + mac->addr_bytes[3]++;
>
> You need to generate a new MAC to be safe, just incrementing by one can
> easily cause address conflicts.
I assumed these two MACs would be the only ones connected to the link,
so it should be ok. If I generate a new random one, should I just
assume it is unlikely I got the same?
