On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:38:14PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Alexey Kuznetsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hello! > > > >> It may look weird, but do application really *need* to see eth0 rather > >> than eth858354? > > > > Applications do not care, humans do. :-) > > > > What's about applications they just need to see exactly the same > > device after migration. Not only name, but f.e. also its ifindex. > > If you do not create a separate namespace for netdevices, you will > > inevitably end up with some strange hack sort of VPIDs to translate > > (or to partition) ifindices or to tell that "ping -I eth858354 xxx" > > is too coimplicated application to survive migration. > > > Actually there are applications with peculiar licensing practices that > do look at devices like eth0 to verify you have the appropriate mac, and > do really weird things if you don't have an eth0. > > Plus there are other cases where it can be simpler to hard code things > if it is allowable. (The human factor) Otherwise your configuration > must be done through hotplug scripts. > > But yes there are misguided applications that care.
last time I pointed to such 'misguided' apps which made assumptions that are not necessarily true inside a virtual environment (e.g. pstree, initpid) the general? position was that those apps should be fixed instead adding a 'workaround' note: personally I'm absolutely not against virtualizing the device names so that each guest can have a separate name space for devices, but there should be a way to 'see' _and_ 'identify' the interfaces from outside (i.e. host or spectator context) best, Herbert > Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
