Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-04-01 Thread Michael Mol
On 04/01/2013 09:54 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 09:29:08 -0400, Michael Mol wrote: > >>> MAC addresses are not human-friendly. It would be OK if you could set >>> up aliases, so your firewall rules could use enaabbccddeeff while you >>> could still type eth0. > >> Frankly, I ne

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-04-01 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 09:29:08 -0400, Michael Mol wrote: > > MAC addresses are not human-friendly. It would be OK if you could set > > up aliases, so your firewall rules could use enaabbccddeeff while you > > could still type eth0. > Frankly, I never found 'eth0' to be particularly friendly, either

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-04-01 Thread Kevin Chadwick
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 14:12:17 +0100 Neil Bothwick wrote: > > I still don't understand what's so bad with MAC-based > > identification? I mean, uniqueness defined through MAC Address > > identity, the system name is just a label... > > MAC addresses are not human-friendly. It would be OK if you c

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-04-01 Thread Michael Mol
On 04/01/2013 09:12 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 13:57:42 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: > >> I still don't understand what's so bad with MAC-based identification? I >> mean, uniqueness defined through MAC Address identity, the system name >> is just a label... > > MAC addresses are

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-04-01 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 13:57:42 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: > I still don't understand what's so bad with MAC-based identification? I > mean, uniqueness defined through MAC Address identity, the system name > is just a label... MAC addresses are not human-friendly. It would be OK if you could set up a

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Pandu Poluan
On Apr 1, 2013 1:54 PM, "Neil Bothwick" wrote: > > On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 21:34:51 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > > > > What about USB network adaptors? A user may not even realise they > > > plugged it into a different USB slot from last time, yet the device > > > name changes. > > > > Fair point bu

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:40:09 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > I find the OpenBSD method of different names like fxp0 usefuk You can emulate that with suitable (e)udev rules. -- Neil Bothwick Computers are like Old Testament gods; lots of rules and no mercy. signature.asc Description: PGP sign

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 03:02:51 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > What about USB network adaptors? A user may not even realise they > > plugged it into a different USB slot from last time, yet the device > > name changes. > congratulation, you just found another reason why today's udev sucks.

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 21:34:51 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > > What about USB network adaptors? A user may not even realise they > > plugged it into a different USB slot from last time, yet the device > > name changes. > > Fair point but wouldn't that be only if you plug in two of the same > typ

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Volker Armin Hemmann
Am 31.03.2013 21:55, schrieb Neil Bothwick: > On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:40:09 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > >>> instead of pushing a completely >>> different (and possibly less reliable) naming scheme by default. >> Whilst I wouldn't want them changing on me (though if your physically >> changing t

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Kevin Chadwick
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 20:55:00 +0100 Neil Bothwick wrote: > What about USB network adaptors? A user may not even realise they > plugged it into a different USB slot from last time, yet the device > name changes. Fair point but wouldn't that be only if you plug in two of the same type that the name

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Michael Mol
On 03/31/2013 03:55 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:40:09 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > >>> instead of pushing a completely >>> different (and possibly less reliable) naming scheme by default. >> >> Whilst I wouldn't want them changing on me (though if your physically >> chang

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 15:40:09 +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > > instead of pushing a completely > > different (and possibly less reliable) naming scheme by default. > > Whilst I wouldn't want them changing on me (though if your physically > changing the pci slot then you should be able to handle

Re: [Bulk] [gentoo-user] Re: Udev update and persistent net rules changes

2013-03-31 Thread Kevin Chadwick
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 11:48:19 + (UTC) "Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg)" wrote: > instead of pushing a completely > different (and possibly less reliable) naming scheme by default. Whilst I wouldn't want them changing on me (though if your physically changing the pci slot then you should be able to h