Michael W Cocke wrote:
On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 17:24:40 -0500, you wrote:
Interesting. However, that author is also making the same mistake that you have to deal with eth0 etc. For example, he uses it in a default route statement. What's wrong with specifying a default route network and then letting the IP stack figure out which NIC to use? Is there any reason why a configuration has to specify a particular NIC, instead of a network address?
Well, in my own particular case (my firewall system) I don't want to leave ANYTHING to chance, since a NIC misassignment will leave my intranet hanging out in the breeze... I could probably get a default route config such as you describe to work, but it seems to me to be more complex than it needs to be.
As I mentioned in another note, SUSE fireall supports NICs specified in the form of eth-id-00:05:5d:fe:fc:e4. Note that this contains the NIC MAC address. It's pretty hard to get confused by specifying the exact piece of hardware. About the only time this might cause some difficulty, is when you replace the NIC. At that point, you'll have to change the MAC address specified. If you absolutely must use ethx, you can always add a few lines to your scripts to grep & cut the output of ifconfig and use the results to do what you want.