Hi all,

On 9/17/21 1:30 PM, Rich Brown wrote:
> Hi Arınç
> 
>> On Sep 17, 2021, at 3:17 AM, Arınç ÜNAL <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> The current naming used on LuCI/UCI is inaccurate and confusing. The 
>> “interfaces” under Network → Interfaces actually represent networks. The 
>> actual interfaces are called “device”.
> 
> I agree that the terminology is confusing. I really struggled with the names 
> when I added them into the preface to the DSA Mini-tutorial 
> (https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/network/dsa/dsa-mini-tutorial). I did 
> some research looking at the original DSA documentation: it didn't offer much 
> in the way of definitions. So I followed my usual practice of documenting the 
> lingo of whatever application I'm using.
> 
> After looking hard at how LuCI seemed to work, I wrote:
> 
> --------
>       • Devices are physical connections that convey bits/frames to other 
> computers. They operate at layer 2 in the protocol stack, have a MAC address 
> along with several other configurable parameters...
>               
>       • Interfaces route IP packets and operate at layer 3 in the protocol 
> stack. An interface is associated with a single device that sends/receives 
> its packets. Interfaces get their IP address parameters by the choice of 
> protocol...
> ---------
> 
> I haven't heard any corrections from others about these assertions, so I am 
> hopeful that I got those definitions right. 
> 
> When you say that "interfaces... actually represent networks" I think you 
> mean that they're "subnets" (and have a subnet address range, IP address, and 
> other characteristics). Is that what you mean? Although I'm neither a Linux 
> OS or network expert, I can see an explanation for using the terms "devices" 
> and "interfaces" as defined above.

This is not always the case.  For example, it is possible to have a tun
or tap interface which does not have a corresponding ip address.  This
is more than just a device, because layer 3 packets can arrive on such
an interface.

Another example, from Freifunk, are mesh (either Ad-Hoc or 802.11s)
interfaces.  These are interfaces which have a static IP address, but
the netmask is 255.255.255.255.  This is not a network in the sense most
people are used to using, but still a completely valid configuration.

I think staying with the terminology "device" and "interface" is the
right way to go.

Greets,
Perry



> 
> In this case, I believe it will be difficult to change the terminology used 
> in OpenWrt/LuCI. I think that train has left the station. Perhaps our efforts 
> will be best used toward documenting the syntax and GUI as it is today, so 
> that people can configure their gear the way they want.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Rich
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
> 

_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Reply via email to