>> vether(4) > It should, but I think a few more things need to get fixed before > that. The bridge is not very efficient, though.
Do you have any valid reason for this style of naming? I'm ok with bridge(4) instead of 'br' device naming which can interference with real device name sooner or later. But vether(4)... What's wrong with you? It should called 'veth' rather than that. This is absolutely improper way of device naming. This path could bring skid you for example right to Mac OS X dirs naming like '/Library/Users/Vether' without any shortenings.
