Re: network interface *name* alias support?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jon Masters
Date: Friday, May 23, 2008 - 12:06 pm

On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 10:44 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:

Yep, that's all great until the bus topology changes underneath you.
There is a need for alias support, because it will allow distributions
to assign a name based upon the *slot ordering specified by the vendor*
and therefore allow a consistent slot number no matter what hotplug
happens, what devices are added or removed, which devices are on-board
vs. in cards, and even (eventually) for non-PCI cards.

In the case of Fedora, right now, we have files:

ifcfg-eth<whatever>

These bind to an interface based on the MAC address. If you swap out the
card, you lose. If you pull out the disks from the machine and put them
into another similar machine, you lose. If you put the disks from the
machine into a less similar machine, but one that still has multiple
network interfaces, you lose.

Some enterprise distributions actually have to play with "bfsort" PCI
enumeration orderings in order to ensure that network devices come up in
a reliable order...this is not the way to be (in the longer term)
determining what order the vendor thinks those cards should be in. This
is why they have a DMI extension that allows them to specify this
without being concerned with PCI bus orderings, or anything else.

My intention is to also allow for:

ifcfg-slot_<whatever>

Where the configuration is based entirely upon what vendor <XYZ> says is
the first, second, or third card. Then, those who want to use the older
names can continue to do so, but those who prefer to base their
configuration upon the order the vendor states, can do so.

Jon.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jan Engelhardt, (Fri May 23, 9:31 am)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Kok, Auke, (Fri May 23, 10:14 am)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Rick Jones, (Fri May 23, 10:44 am)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jon Masters, (Fri May 23, 12:06 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jon Masters, (Fri May 23, 12:11 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jan Engelhardt, (Fri May 23, 1:46 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jon Masters, (Fri May 23, 1:55 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Thomas Graf, (Fri May 23, 3:54 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jon Masters, (Fri May 23, 9:25 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jan Engelhardt, (Fri May 23, 9:53 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Matt Domsch, (Fri May 23, 10:16 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, James Chapman, (Sat May 24, 2:15 am)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, David Woodhouse, (Sat May 24, 2:33 am)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, James Chapman, (Sat May 24, 3:37 am)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Stephen Hemminger, (Sat May 24, 11:12 am)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Patrick McHardy, (Sat May 24, 1:31 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jan Engelhardt, (Sat May 24, 1:54 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Patrick McHardy, (Sat May 24, 8:07 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, David Miller, (Sun May 25, 5:17 am)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Matt Domsch, (Tue May 27, 12:03 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Jan Engelhardt, (Tue May 27, 2:49 pm)
Re: network interface *name* alias support?, Thomas Graf, (Tue May 27, 3:11 pm)