Re: Specifying names for tap interfaces

[Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 01:25:11PM +1000, Darren Reed wrote:
> > But I don't want "proxy0". I want "proxy". Or some other name with
> > more than 16 chars, in some case.
> 
> It doesn't work.

This is why user-settable names are not so great.

> 
> Network interfaces should have one name that is used by all of
> the regular TCP/IP tools. That name needs to fit in with the
> expectations of various tools that exist today. It also needs
> to fit in with what administrators will expect to use but most
> importantly, the name used is the same for both input and output.
> Always.

This is where I dissagree. I don't propose to replace the name with
something else, I propose to add an alternate lookup mechanism.

> 
> Your idea of label or aliases for network interfaces is something
> that should at best be supported by your shell environment. It
> is the usual place for aliases. It is not something that should
> be supported by the kernel.

But as the shell isn't always used to access network interface, it's not
the right place.

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--