Hi, some people asked me if pair(4) is a superset of vether(4). It is not (anymore).
The most important difference is the link state handling: while the link of vether(4) is always active as soon as it is configured up, the link state of pair(4) is up when it is patched into a second pair(4). And, like proper real Ethernet interfaces, the link state is not depending on the administrative state up or down. Due to this fact, you cannot use "just one" stand-alone pair(4) in a bridge(4) - it is not a drop-in replacement for vether(4) - as all associated routes will remain down until you patch it. For the manpage, OK? Reyk Index: pair.4 =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man4/pair.4,v retrieving revision 1.1 diff -u -p -u -p -r1.1 pair.4 --- pair.4 24 Oct 2015 10:52:05 -0000 1.1 +++ pair.4 24 Oct 2015 14:54:22 -0000 @@ -71,6 +71,18 @@ It has been extended and turned into .Xr pair 4 by .An Reyk Floeter Aq Mt r...@openbsd.org . +.Sh CAVEATS +Unlike +.Xr vether 4 , +the +.Xr pair 4 +interface cannot be used as a stand-alone member in a +.Xr bridge 4 ; +the link state remains down until it is connected to the second interface. +Any associated routes will be marked down until it is patched. +Use +.Xr vether 4 +as a bridge endpoint for routing purposes instead. .Sh BUGS Like .Xr tun 4 ,
