On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 17:02:23 +0100 Hannes Frederic Sowa <han...@stressinduktion.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015, at 16:50, Maximilian Wilhelm wrote: > > > I'm not sure I understand how this would work- are we going to > > > pin down the ifindex for some subset of interfaces? > > > > I'm not sure what your idea is, but I guess we might mean the same > > thing: > > > > What I have in mind is that the user can supply a list of (ifname -> > > ifindex) entries via a sysfs/procfs interface and if such a list is > > present, the kernel will search the list for every ifname which is > > registered and check if there is an entry. If there is, the ifindex > > for this entry is used. If there is no entry found for the given > > ifname, the usual algorithm is used (therefore inherently providing > > backward compatibility). > > Sorry to ask because I don't like this feature at all. There was a lot > of work on stable interface names. Why do you need stable ifindexes, > which were never meant to be stable for a longer amount of time? Also current versions of SNMP provide more useful information about network interface slot information in ifDescription -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
