Joseph Kowalski writes: > James Carlson wrote: > > Yes, vanity naming solves the problem pretty neatly. No, vanity > > naming doesn't exist yet and this case isn't dependent on it. The > > best we can do is to warn users that such a name change is *in the > > general case* infeasible. > > > Gee, I must have slept through something. What is "vanity naming" and > where can I get some? (Pointers that is...)
Sorry; that was too terse. It's a reference to "Clearview Nemo unification and vanity naming" (PSARC 2006/499; also known as "UV"), which will provide the ability to rename network interfaces. One of the most important usage cases for this feature (despite the "vanity naming" title for the project) is to be able to keep the name of an interface the same. Say, for example, you pull out a "qfe" card and replace with a "ce" card. UV will allow you to rename the new ce0 interface back to qfe0, so that all those configuration files that refer to qfe0 won't have to change. It's an aid for DR and zone migration, among other things. > Remember the days when all you needed was a major and minor number, and > then we could call it anything you wanted? 8^) You still can, but the name (and typically not the number, other than for Sun Cluster) ends up getting embedded in software that refers to the node, and thus you can't _change_ the name without hunting down the affected consumers. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
