Re: Question to new network device names
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 13:52:03 +0200
- From: <tomas@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Question to new network device names
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 01:11:27PM +0200, Hans wrote:
> Hi folks,
> I stumbled over the new network names (i.e. wl0p8 instead of wlan0), and of
> course I know, that this is obviously the newe standard (please correct me, i
> I am wrong).
Relax. You can just choose whatever fits you (if you mix and match, though,
you better know what you are doing :)
> What I would like to know: Is this new naming scheme an international standard
> on all linux distributions, or is this just a debian thing? At the moment, I
> renamed all devices to the old names (wlan0, eth0 and so on), as I many tools
> are still want the old names (however, it might be, that these are also not
> renewed documentations).
Freedesktop has a well-written rationale  for the new naming scheme. That
said, freedesktop is... freedesktop, and has a clear stance on this.
> So, what is the status today? How have people accepted the new names also for
> long running systems?
I'd say: if you have a box with a huge number of interfaces, or if your
interface's hardware is brought up dynamically (picture a bunch of USB
hubs with 16 eth interface adapters at its tips, to have something your
phantasy can attach to), where the loading order of the corresponding
kernel modules determine who is first and who is last, whoever is eth0
and whoever is eth15 may change from boot to boot.
You don't want that, especially when those are attached to different
networks (picture a firewall/router...)
A similar case is when the interfaces come and go (e.g. plugging in and
out said USB adapters. All this doesn't need to be USB -- in the more
expensive world you can plug in (and out!) RAM and CPUs, while the
system is running).
Predictable names (try to) bring up the "same" interface with the "same"
name each time (although "same" itself isn't well-defined; IMHO this
makes a 100% job impossible anyway).
> I think, most people might rename their stuff, just as I did, because they are
> more comfortable with the old names.
That's what I do: my workhorse has two built-in interfaces, one wired
and one wireless. Their good-ol' names are thus very predictable indeed,
namely "eth0" and "wlan0". The whole kaboodle is thus useless in this
> I would be happy for a little bit background information and if I am a
> dinosaur with old names.
If it ain't broke...
Just understand what the new scheme is for. Digest it. Convinced you
want/need it? Go for it! Not convinced? Keep the old.
Change for change's sake is as ill-advised as blind aversion to change
The nice thing about free software is that you have the choice. Once you
climb up the "stack" and pile complexity up, your choice is reduced (gotta
pay a price for that comfort, right?), but the cool thing is that you
yourself find your point of equilibrium (gotta pay a price for that, and
that too: keep yourself informed :-)
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----