Kais Belgaied wrote: > David Edmondson wrote On 02/11/07 11:01 PM,: > >> * Darren.Reed at Sun.COM [2007-02-12 00:16:07] >> >>> Can I change which physical interface a VNIC is backed by without >>> destroying/unpluming it? >>> >> >> >> That's not possible today. It's not on the feature list for Nevada >> putback either. >> >> > > yep. > thus far, the physical NIC has been viewed as a defining property of > the VNIC, > and, unlike other attributes, don't change. > > Now with Clearview link vanity naming, one could consider associating > the bandwidth, > MAC address, etc ...) attributes to the user-chosen link name, and not > the underlying MAC (phys. or virt.) device. > In that case, when the name is re-assigned to a different MAC thing, > it is intuitive that the attributes > follow. > But then, if we view the link name as just an alias for the link, then > none of the attributes would be > carried forward when the name is reassigned to designate another link.
I think you see the problem - two names, one device. Which one to use and which one will people expect to be used? Can we define the vnic by its ethernet address and not mention the link name, so that if the card moves slots, then the resource definition(s) will follow the card? > A similar question could actually be asked about other components that > use the link name, > such as IPsec policies, or IPFiler rules. Vanity naming should automatically activate/deactivate IP Filter rules that have matching IP interface names that appear/disappear. Bugs notwithstanding, IP Filter has always supported filter rules containing names for interfaces that are not present and turning them "on"/"off" as the come and go. I can load "pass in on kais0 ..." because even if kais0 does not exist now, at some point in the future, it may... What about typos/finger mistakes (ie having beg0 and not bge0)? Can't save users from themselves >:-) Darren
