On Apr 22, 2005, at 6:29 PM, Bill Studenmund wrote:

> Second, I'm not 100% sure how this will break Strong ES. I expect  
> if we
> add Strong ES support, we will have some sort of sysctl to control it.
> Given that, I'd expect any of these changes could (actually should)
> likewise be conditional on said sysctl, just in the opposite sense;  
> these
> things would be turned off if not appropriate.

I would go so far as to say Strong ES vs Weak ES should be  
controllable at a per-ifaddr granularity.

-- thorpej