Re: Specifying names for tap interfaces

[Gert Doering <gert%greenie.muc.de@localhost>]

Hi,

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 05:42:36PM +0200, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> a way to associate an interface name with its driver name is a must have. 

I'm not sure I fully understand this argument.  Why does the driver name
have to be visible in the name of the interface?  I know that "all BSDs
have ever done it that way" - but then, you have it in the kernel boot
messages, for those who really need to know "ah, eth3 is wm, eth4 is em"...

As a sysadmin, I find it actually somewhat annoying that my interface
name changes if I happen to swap a broken network card vs. another one
with a different chip on it, instead of "the first ethernet interface" 
reliably being "eth0".

(Of course the Linux way of just iterating eth<n> interfaces is not without
its own set of problems if the initialization sequence of drivers changes
for whatever reason)

gert

-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             
gert%greenie.muc.de@localhost
fax: +49-89-35655025                        
gert%net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de@localhost