Re: Specifying names for tap interfaces

[Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

> Linux's method associates names by driver type (eth0, eth1, etc).
> HP-UX uses a similar approach with "lan0", etc.
> Solaris (from 11 onwards) uses a more neutral name with "net0" being
> the first interface, "net1", etc.

> None of the above use labels or create extra complications in order
> to deliver user-friendly names,

How is "eth0" or "net0" any user-friendlier (for any value of "user")
than "fxp0"?

It's true that NetBSD's current scheme depends on probe order to tell
the difference between (say) fxp0 and fxp1.  But I have trouble seeing
how making that _worse_ is an improvement; with the current scheme, you
can at least tell which is which when you have an fxp, a wm, an sk, a
vr, and an ex.  Even if, say, you have two fxps, the interface
identification problem is at least partially solved, and I think
partially solved is better than not-at-all solved.  Even if all
interfaces on the machine use the same driver, the current scheme is no
worse than the Linux/HP-UX/Solaris way.

/~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML                mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B