On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 2:14 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I think we should just name the driver 'bpfnet'; it's not pretty, but > > it's obvious and descriptive. Optionally we could teach 'ip' to > > understand just 'bpf' as the device type, so you could go 'ip link add > > type bpf' and get one of these. > > I'll think about it, the bpfnet sounds terrible as you also noticed. I > definitely don't like that. Perhaps meta_net as suggested by Andrii in > the other thread could be a compromise. Need to sleep over it, my pref > was actually to keep it shorter. I don't like the meta name either standalone or as meta_net. Maybe "hollow" or "void" netdevice? Since this netdev doesn't have a substance when bpf prog is not attached. It's empty == dummy == hollow == void netdevice.
