Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Tue 25th Jan 2011 14:23 UTC, submitted by Debjit
Fedora Core "Fedora developer, Matt Domsch, has announced that Fedora 15 is breaking the conventional ethX naming scheme used for Ethernet devices by adopting a new scheme called Consistent Network Device Naming."
Thread beginning with comment 459626
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Why?
by rexstuff on Tue 25th Jan 2011 18:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Why?"
rexstuff
Member since:
2007-04-06

But most systems already do this automatically. Check out your /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules

It seems to me that Fedora has come up with a more complicated solution to an already-solved problem. A minor, but needless additional fragmentation of Linux user space consistency.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Why?
by phoenix on Tue 25th Jan 2011 18:38 in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Looking at the naming scheme, it will fail with something as simple as changing the direction that PCI buses are enumerated by the BIOS.

Boot with "Descending" selected in the BIOS, and the top PCI slot on a desktop is bus 0. Boot with "Ascending" selected in the BIOS, and the top PCI slot is now bus 4.

Thus, your PCI NIC will change from pci0#0 to pci4#0.

Yeah, that's consistent.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Why?
by rexstuff on Tue 25th Jan 2011 21:00 in reply to "RE[3]: Why?"
rexstuff Member since:
2007-04-06

Ok, seriosuly - how often does that really happen? If you're changing the order in which PCI devices are enumerated, such a bug resulting from that would be labelled YOUROWNSTUPIDFAULT.

Also, I would point out that the scheme presented by fedora would also be vulnerable to that; it relies on the enumeration provided by the BIOS.

Further, how difficult is to sudo rm /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules ? And, the current system allows sysadmins to force a device to a particular ethX name; one can override the system and make a device eth1 instead of eth0. Fedora's system seems ot provide no such flexibility.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Why?
by Neolander on Tue 25th Jan 2011 19:22 in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Then indeed this doesn't seem very relevant. Don't know why they do it this way in this case.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Why?
by phoenix on Tue 25th Jan 2011 21:06 in reply to "RE[2]: Why?"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Hrm, weird, my reply to your post showed up as a reply to the parent of your post.

And my reply to the parent showed up as a reply to you.

Reply Parent Score: 2