I think that change is appropriate for pf.

-- 
  Sent from a phone, apologies for poor formatting.

On 20 October 2024 03:59:33 Brad Smith <brad@comstyle.com> wrote:
> On 2024-10-13 5:52 a.m., Kirill A. Korinsky wrote:
>> ports@, Brad, Here a backport of small fix for OpenBSD from mine PR to fix 
>> 2.4 branch on
>> OpenBSD: https://github.com/dovecot/core/pull/224 Right now I can find in 
>> logs a errors like: Fatal: connect(...) failed: Address already in use not 
>> often, like a few times per week. With this fix which extend FreeBSD's 
>> condition to OpenBSD as well, such
>> errors dissapears. The diff:
> Seeing as the PR is a bunch of fixes, either way put a brief description
> at the top of the patch. You might want to look at updating the comment
> at the very top of lib/net.c to include OpenBSD.
> for (try = 0;;) { fd = net_connect_ip_once(ip, port, my_ip, sock_type, 
> blocking); if (fd != -1 || try++ >= MAX_CONNECT_RETRIES || (errno != 
> EADDRNOTAVAIL
> #if defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__OpenBSD__) /* busy */ && errno != 
> EADDRINUSE /* pf may cause this if another connection used the same port 
> recently */ && errno != EACCES
> #endif )) I am not sure what is considered normal and appropriate for userland
> network and PF. I guess I'd be Ok if someone else more familiar with
> these kinds of bits said this is appropriate.
>>