| 1 |
Am Tue, 2 Apr 2013 20:31:10 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
schrieb Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@×××××.com>: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 2013-04-02, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > No, you are stilling misunderstanding. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> He's not the only one. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> > The news item goes to great lengths to explain that there is a new |
| 11 |
> > way and it is different from the old way. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I did grok that much. I had a 70-persistent-net.rules file that named |
| 14 |
> my three interfaces "eth0" "eth1" and "eth2" based on their MAC |
| 15 |
> addresses. After reading the news item and flameeyes blog, I was still |
| 16 |
> pretty much at a loss regarding what I was actually supposed to _do_. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
AFAIU, as soon as the names in your rules file differ from the in-kernel names |
| 19 |
(e.g., if the kernel switches eth0 and eth1), bad things can happen during |
| 20 |
renaming, due to deadlocks or something like that (others will have understood |
| 21 |
it better and should explain it rather than I). |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
So, again AFAIU, it's enough to change the network device names from eth* to |
| 24 |
net*, or whatever you desire (I went with Flameeyes naming scheme). The |
| 25 |
important thing is that your device names *don't* use the in-kernel namespace |
| 26 |
"eth*". See section 3 "Old interface naming rules" in the news item and the |
| 27 |
references therein. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The new default naming scheme is AFAICT orthogonal to that. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
HTH |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Marc Joliet |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we |
| 36 |
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup |
Archives