On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 04:50:50PM +0100, Guido Jäkel wrote: > On 16.01.2015 16:31, Stéphane Graber wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 04:13:39PM +0100, Guido Jäkel wrote: > >> On 15.01.2015 23:08, Stéphane Graber ACKd: > >>> + By default, <command>lxc</command> chooses a name for the > >> > >> Is this the truth? I expect the veth driver (or the system) itself create > >> the default names. > >> > >> > >> BTW: I'm using the container name as the outerside name for the veth. For > >> me, is very convenient to have this direct correlation, e.g. for automated > >> naming at SNMP-Discovery and -Monitoring. > >> > >> Guido > > > > It's the truth. LXC uses a vethXXXX template rather than what you'd get > > from the kernel which is just vethX where X is an incrementing digit. > > Well, I should have taken a look in the code repository before. Please, may I > then (nevertheless) ask for the motivation of the choice for pattern vethXXXX > ?
I'm not sure what the initial reason for it is. However to me it makes it trivial to differentiate lxc-created veth devices vs manually created ones. Another potential reason why this was done to begin with is that if they are sequentially numbered and a container side veth is moved back to the host namespace, a name clash is likely which would then make the kernel rename it to renameX and would confuse anything which assumes that veth* are veth devices and that everything else can be used for host connectivity (like NetworkManager). -- Stéphane Graber Ubuntu developer http://www.ubuntu.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ lxc-devel mailing list lxc-devel@lists.linuxcontainers.org http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-devel