[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Device naming for wireless NICs...

To: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Device naming for wireless NICs...
From: Tomasz Torcz <zdzichu@xxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:36:57 +0100
In-reply-to: <405093A7.90209@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20040304023524.GA19453@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040310165548.A24693@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040310172114.GA8867@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <404F5097.4040406@xxxxxxxxx> <20040310175200.GA9531@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <404F5744.1040201@xxxxxxxxx> <20040311024816.GC3738@xxxxxxxxx> <404FD6BC.7090409@xxxxxxxxx> <20040311031709.GC3782@xxxxxxxxx> <405093A7.90209@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 10:28:23AM -0600, James Ketrenos wrote:
> I don't mind adding a module parameter to change the default name (if that 
> is the standard practice), but thought I'd see what others thing rather 
> than just going off and doing something random.

 This could be handled by nameif in userspace.
> Is there a technical or ease of use reason switching away from ethX?  My 
> thinking in keeping it eth was that it then represents a greater chance of 
> "just working" with most networking scripts and utilities that may assume 
> ethX is the interface name.

 I personally find them broken. I had to remove checking the name from
ethtool to make it work. Ethtool checks for 'eth' or 'usb' in name,
which do not work with my e1000 renamed to 'ep0'.

Tomasz Torcz                Only gods can safely risk perfection,     
zdzichu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx     it's a dangerous thing for a man.  -- Alia

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>