Re: Specifying names for tap interfaces

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

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 05:34:05PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> El 29/06/2012 16:33, "Manuel Bouyer" <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost> 
> escribió:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 04:24:33PM +0100, David Brownlee wrote:
> > > On 29 June 2012 15:16, Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost> 
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 03:10:13PM +0100, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > > >> >Yes, it's not intended to be more than a convenience. user-settable
> names
> > > >> >aren't more than this either (but less convenient, IMHO).
> > > >>
> > > >> This conversation has gone really long, and I'm still not sure of
> > > >> the outcome of it. I have however a simple patch that allows
> > > >> renaming network interfaces. Is there any interest on posting it?
> > > >
> > > > renaming interfaces alone is not acceptable
> > >
> > > While I don't want to open the entire can of worms again, would
> > > renaming interfaces plus boot time name always being visible as a
> > > human readable value from ifconfig be sufficient?
> >
> > It depends for what they're being used. Roger, why do you want this ?
> > Isn't passing a FD to qemu instead of a name working ?
> 
> I haven't tried that yet, I assume it will work. Anyway I had this half
> done, because I think it's an interesting feature, not only as a fix to the
> Qemu issue.

I think it's not the right way to fix the qemu issue.

> For example being able to name Xen virtual interfaces in the
> Dom0 with a user defined name, but I'm sure other users will come up with
> other uses. What would you require for this functionality?

At the very last, being able to get the driver name and instance
number in a convenient way (e.g. in ifconfig output).

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