> > I agree. Dynamic switch part is buggy, we can start with not > > allowing interfaces resulting in dynamic switch. > > Does this mean that when bringing up multiple interfaces, users would > need to figure out the 'magic' order that works? I think we need to talk about hardware capabilities at this point. I was assuming that it would actually be possible to run two interfaces with different paths here concurrently - is that not true? If that's not true, then we absolutely _need_ dynamic switching, I agree with Felix, but then we have a pretty big complication to figure out. But we can't let this optimisation affect user experience. johannes
