Re: kernel frameworks for jumbo frame

[Piotr Meyer <aniou%smutek.pl@localhost>]

On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 08:33:43PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
[...]

> On a system that only has one ethernet card, it's highly annoying
> that I have to figure out if this is a "em0" or "igb0" - or an
> "eno1" vs. "enp0s25" (both "onboard ethernet 0", but BIOS tables
> leading udev to believing the second one isn't).  So "eth0, always"
> would be very convenient.  Or possibly "eth0" for "wired ethernet"
> and "wifi0" for wireless - as that's a common scenario.

Nowadays I'm pretty sure that so-called "predictable interface names",
dependent on physical layout of mainboard was a terrible mistake. 
Hardware itself doesn't guarantee consistent and dependable behaviour,
especially between different vendors.

Some examples: onboard ethernet card on my mainboard was identified as
enp0s25 but inserting SERIAL controller (four RS232 ports) into PCIe 
slot lead to renaming onboard interface to... enp16s0. Why? I have no 
clue.

Friend of mine has two-ports Intel card. Internally implemented as two
different PCIe functions and available as... enp0s0f0 and enp0s0f1d1
(but it is subject to change between different kernel versions 8-0).

With a brand-new mobo there is no chance to guess interface name without
test run. Classic Linux behaviour has two possibilities: simply "eth0" 
in any case or interface renaming based on MAC-addresses (fortunately
MAC addr is usually known). BSD names also gives us a chance - usually
we know something about network card manufacturer.

-- 
Piotr 'aniou' Meyer