| 1 |
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 07:44:39PM +0100, Tobias Klausmann wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi! |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013, Peter Stuge wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Tobias Klausmann wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > It has been rather nifty that if I walk up to a random machine |
| 7 |
> > > with exactly one NIC (that I've been asked to examine/fix), I |
| 8 |
> > > _know_ that there will be eth0 and only that. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Only as long as that system hasn't seen *another* NIC first, if it |
| 11 |
> > has persistent interface name udev rules. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I was talking about strictly kernel order vs. predictable-net. |
| 14 |
> Persistent-net has VM-related downsides as pointed out in the |
| 15 |
> udev page about the whole thing. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The problem is the kernel names are not dependable. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
If you have one network card right now, sure, it will be eth0. |
| 20 |
But, suppose you buy another network card and plug it into the system. |
| 21 |
Now you have no way to know that eth0 will refer to the card you think |
| 22 |
it does. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
With the predictable names, on my system for example, I know that enp1s5 |
| 25 |
will always refer to the same nic, even if I put a new one in the box. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
William |
Archives