On Thursday 2009-12-17 14:54, Narendra_K@xxxxxxxx wrote: >We have been having discussions in the netdev list and >anaconda-devel-list about creating multiple names for the network >interfaces to bring determinism >into the way network interfaces are named in the OSes. In specific, >"eth0 in the OS does not always map to the integrated NIC Gb1 as labeled >on the chassis". This resulted in failures where user space expected the >port with link up to be "eth0", which in many cases would not be the >case. >For example, installers and firewall. I concur, with one exception: if, considering a single multi-port card, I get interface names in reverse to what is printed on the adapter. That looks like a manufacturer fail. The firewall does not care. Just keep the name constant, which is what udev's 70-persistent-net.rules already does. >* Installer would provide options to the users to name the interfaces >based on different naming conventions such as > >a)Chassis label - For Ex: Embedded_NIC_1[23..] >b)Driver based names - For Ex: bce0, bce1 etc As far as I can tell, all (Ethernet) driver names default to ethX (or wlanX) only. >For example - > >/sbin/ifconfig Embedded_NIC_1 >/sbin/ip Embedded_NIC_N > >http://linux.dell.com/libnetdevname/patches/net-tools-1.60_libnetdevname >.patch >http://linux.dell.com/libnetdevname/patches/ethtool-6_libnetdevname.patc >h >http://linux.dell.com/libnetdevname/patches/iproute2-2.6.29_libnetdevnam >e.patch ) > >We would like to know the views of the upstream maintainers of the tools >about this proposal. The development of net-tools has long ceased (since 2001), except that no one seems to notice and everybody still applies voltage to a dead horse. It's only going to smell bad. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
