Tom H wrote: > On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 18:17:11 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: > > Tom H wrote: > >> Mark Copper wrote: > >>> Tom H wrote: > >>>> You have "allow-hotplug eth0:0" without an "iface eth0:0 ..." line.
I think the problem was the other way around. It was allow-hotplug eth0:0 when it should have been eth0:1. > >>> I think I do, but why is it necessary? I thought it was only for > >>> dynamic changes. and this server never needs them. > >> > >> "iface ..." defines the interface and "allow-hotplug ..." allows > >> udev to hotplug it. Without "iface ...", "allow-hotplug ..." is of > >> no use. You must have meant to have "allow-hotplug eth0:1", not > >> "allow-hotplug eth0:0". > > > > Right. allow-hotplug is for udev. auto is for static boot. The > > presence of "auto" should work at boot time since eth0:1 was listed in > > the first auto line. > > I wasn't clear. The "allow-hotplug eth0:0" line's of no use without > an "iface eth0:0 ..." line. Right. But the interface described is eth0:1 and that is there and also has an auto line. Twice. Let's face it, the file was a little bit generally messed up. The indention was confusing. It needed some cleanup. I know we both understand the file format. We are just quibbling over which direction of mistake was made which isn't too interesting given that both mistake possibilities were not intended. > >>> strange, but it's in the wiki. > >> > >> I'm sorry. I've just looked at the wiki and I didn't know that there > >> was a new (?) iproute configuration style. > > > > I think that is a new ifupdown configuration style. It was ifupdown > > that changed. AFAIK iproute is the same. > > s/iproute/ifupdown/ > > For reference see: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=717878 > > And: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=717887 > > No time for the references right now but thanks. I'll check them out > some time between now and Sunday... :) > > I _AGAIN_ wasn't clear; sorry. > > I meant that now that ifupdown is using iproute's "ip" rather than > net-tools' "ifconfig" and "route", it can now assign more than one > ip address to a nic without appending ":X" to the nic's name. Yes. $ strings /sbin/ifup | grep -c '\<ip\>' 42 $ strings /sbin/ifup | grep '\<ip\>' | head ip link set dev %iface% down ip link set dev %iface% up ip tunnel del %iface% /sbin/ip ip tunnel add %iface% mode %mode% remote %endpoint% [[local %local%]] [[ttl %ttl%]] ip link set %iface% up [[mtu %mtu%]] ip addr add %address%/%netmask% dev %iface% [[peer %dstaddr%]] [[ ip route add default via %gateway% ]] ip addr add %address%[[/%netmask%]] [[broadcast %broadcast%]] [[peer %pointopoint%]] [[scope %scope%]] dev %iface% label %iface% ip link set dev %iface% [[mtu %mtu%]] [[address %hwaddress%]] up $ strings /sbin/ifup | grep '\<ifconfig\>' ifconfig %iface% down Older Debian: $ strings /sbin/ifup | grep -c ifconfig 10 It uses 'ip' now. Bob
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
