Subject: Re: history, design, or both?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Feico Dillema <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/03/2001 00:32:23
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 05:14:50PM -0600, Dan Debertin wrote:
> The possible reasons I could come up with were history -- "it's always
> been that way and no-one wants to/has time to change it" -- or a
> technical design reason that I'm not thinking of.
> So. Which one is it?
I think it is historical, combined with having no reason to change it.
Having your ehterhnet interface called eth0 consistently, has only
advantages on desktop machines with only a single ethernet card. On
multihomed machines and especially routers, the ethX naming has no
advantages are even disadvantages (like adding a level of indirection
to discovering what hardware it is). Scripts would be better to rely
on the use of the output of proper tools like NetBSD's ifconfig, than
on what information a naming scheme would provide...