Hello,
: A stupid question: which is recomended?
The iproute2 tools expose all of the complexity of the Linux kernel in a
clear and transparent way, so I recommend iproute2 for any but the most
pedestrian uses of IP addressing on Linux boxen. Naturally, for
workstations and standalone boxen, there's no need--you will get the same
result by using the much more platform agnostic ifconfig tool.
: I have 1 interface eth0. I need to set about 20 virtual interfaces
: eth0:xx on it.
:
: If I create them with ifconfig eth0:xx I see it with ifconfig and with
: ip addr ls. If I set it with 'ip addr add', ifconfig don't show them,
: but 'ip addr ls' and 'route' show them. So, which is better?
As a previous poster (Alan Ford) has suggested, you can use the label
parameter to your "ip addr" command lines. This will allow you to use
both ifconfig and iproute2 tools to see what IP addresses are active on a
given interface.
: PS: I can't find anywhere docs about relationship between 'old'
: utilities ifconfig, route, etc and the iproute2 package. Point me to
: some comparision between them, please.
I don't have any documentation specifically about the relationship between
the two utilities, although you may find some answers in my guide [0].
Each utility reports (in a different way) on the current configuration of
interfaces and their addresses.
Best of luck,
-Martin
[0] http://linux-ip.net/
http://linux-ip.net/html/tools-ip-management.html
--
Martin A. Brown --- SecurePipe, Inc. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
