Subject: Re: "A nick for a NIC" - question and/or feature suggestion...
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Zbigniew Baniewski <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/19/2007 21:14:27
On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 08:32:39PM +0200, Tobias Nygren wrote:
> I don't think it's _that_ much work involved in s/ep0/ex0/.
> How often do you change your interfaces? :-)
Yes, but I must remember: ...this file has to be changed... this one...
...and this one too. Oops! I forgot two others, recently added. :-O
> But if you really need this, a trick is to use a bridge and attach
> a dummy tap interface. Then you can use tap0 in your configuration
> files and only change ifconfig.bridge0 when installing a new NIC:
> # cat ifconfig.tap0
> !sysctl -w net.link.tap.tap0=00:00:f8:06:f2:96
> inet 220.127.116.11/24
> # cat ifconfig.bridge0
> !brconfig $int add tap0 add hme0 up
> # cat ifconfig.hme0
> media 10baset
> tcp4csum udp4csum
Thanks, I wasn't aware, that such kind of workaround is possible for today.
But pay attention: wouldn't it be simpler in the way, I proposed? Even all
the config files would look a bit clearer, having entries like:
"external_nic", "internal_interface" instead of just "rtk0" and so on. Yes,
one can live without this - just like without several other things.
Not being kernel developer, I'm unable to estimate amount of work, which
implementing such feature could take. But, if not that much... I can't see
any real "contras" at the moment.
pozdrawiam / regards