On 2010/04/19 08:34, Simon Perreault wrote: > On 2010-04-19 08:31, Gregory Edigarov wrote: > >sometimes it is better and necessary to have interfaces named under one > >standartized name like fether0... fetherN for example > > Why? And how can groups not accomplish that?
There is one place I've found where groups aren't supported; PF 'set skip on' has some special 'match the first letters of the interface name' code rather than using interface groups. The only place I've remotely wished for names other than our standard schema is when using vlans (e.g. freebsd-style bge0.1700 creating a vlan with tag 1700 on bge0), but not really wanted it badly enough to do anything about it...
