On Tue, 13 May 2025 06:00:47 +0200,
Claudio Jeker <cjeker@diehard.n-r-g.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 11:35:37PM +0200, Kirill A. Korinsky wrote:
> > tech@,
> > 
> > I'd like to suggest a diff which brings support of egress group for
> > interfaces which is in non-zero rdomain.
> > 
> > Feedback? Ok?
> 
> I don't think this is a good idea. egress is used in pf.conf e.g. for
> nat-to rules and that will break this usage. Which is one of the main
> reasons to have egress in the first place.
> 
> Interface groups do not respect rdomain boundaries and I see no good way
> how to fix this.
> 
> This is why we should only provide egress for rdomain / rtable 0.
>

I see. When we need at least document it.

Like this?

   The interfaces from the default rdomain with the default routes point to
   are members of the “egress” interface group.


Index: sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/src/sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8,v
diff -u -p -r1.402 ifconfig.8
--- sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8	27 Mar 2025 15:15:46 -0000	1.402
+++ sbin/ifconfig/ifconfig.8	13 May 2025 08:17:43 -0000
@@ -245,7 +245,9 @@ interfaces are members of the
 .Dq pppx
 interface group.
 .It
-The interfaces the default routes point to are members of the
+The interfaces from the default
+.Ar rdomain
+with the default routes point to are members of the
 .Dq egress
 interface group.
 .It


-- 
wbr, Kirill