> * Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> [2011-05-19 11:21]: > > > Note that the default ruleset does include a 'set skip on lo' but > > > that's fine since lo* interfaces are by default added to the "lo" > > > group. > > > > > > If people get bitten by this change, they could either add > > > an interface-name-matching group to each interface or we do that > > > automatically, as is done for vlan's, lo's etc. > > > > What does anyone else think about this (making em0 a member > > of em automatically, etc.)? I don't think it's really all that > > important, there are usually better grouping criteria than > > "what driver supports the device" and people have to change > > their ruleset this release anyway. > > we have specifically decided to NOT do this. what prupose does a group > of all interface of a certain driver have? I see zero for teh regular > drivers. the ones where it makes sense are the clonables like ppp and > for those we have automatic base class group, i. e. all tun interfaces > end up in the tun group by default.
I agree. I would like to see the driver-matching semantics go away for physical devices. "em" and "bnx" are stupid from a semantic viewpoint. We are making it harder to use interface groups. ifconfig lo0 group bnx
