On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Jonathan Billings <billings@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> I'm trying Centos7 and using systemD. I've noticed that interfaces
>> name does not have anymore eth0,eth1, ethN but a different name.
>>
>> What do you think about predictable network if name assigned by systemd?
>
> For what its worth, there was a change in device naming in CentOS 6
> (going from eth0 -> em1, for example) which affected a subset of
> hardware out there (We saw it on Dell hardware, mostly). We had
> already managed to deal with the fact tha 'eth0' is no longer
> guarenteed (in scripts, usually by looking in /sys/class/net/), so
> dealing with non-eth0-naming wasn't a huge surprise, however, the way
> devices are named changed. For what it's worth, I am not thrilled
> with the incredibly complex names but I understand their utility.
eth0 was never guaranteed to be the 'right' interface - or even to
exist in some circumstances with udev naming. If scripts using fixed
names ever worked it was mostly a matter of luck.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
