> -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Small [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 12:04 PM > To: Stephen Hemminger > Cc: K, Narendra; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-hotplug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Domsch, Matt; Rose, Charles; Hargrave, > Jordan; Nijhawan, Vijay > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use firmware provided index to register a network > interface > > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=125510301513312&w=2 > >> Out of interest, that link says that doing it in usespace was > rejected, > >> but doesn't give any references... I'd be interested to know why > this > >> wasn't viable - since this seemed like the best fit at first glance > - > >> most people will never use this, so no need to grow their kernel > size > >> and complexity? > >> > >> > > > > This proposal was to ad changes into every application that > > knows about network names (iproute, iptables, snmp, quagga, openswan, > ...) > > to do aliasing at the application layer. > > > > > OK, that's bonkers, but what I was referring to was the line in the > linked post which said "Achieve the above in userspace only using udev" > - which I assumed meant to do it once in a udev rename rule by adapting > /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules , /lib/udev/write_net_rules > etc. - which is what I've used to enforce this sort of convention > myself > from time to time. > Hi, I was referring to the solution proposed in this thread - http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=125619338904322&w=3 ([PATCH] udev: create empty regular files to represent net). With regards, Narendra K -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
