[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Ipw2100-devel] debian, ipw2200 and wlan0

On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 18:17 +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> ma, 2005-02-07 kello 16:50 +0100, Mike Hommey kirjoitti:

> > Wireless interfaces should be called wlan%d, not eth%d
> Why is this important? Why does the name of a network interface matter?
> All the tools in Debian that can deal with network interfaces are
> neutral about the name and the name isn't particularly significant to
> users either. If one is worried about which interface name corresponds
> to which physical device, guessing from the name is not a good way.
> Using ifconfig or iwconfig or other tools to do it is a better way.
> (I'm not saying that using wlan%d is bad or wrong, I am asking for
> justifications for that name over eth%d.)

Naming wired network eth%d and wireless wlan%d would make things a lot
easier. For example, it is easier to find out whether to start ifplugd
or waproamd when the interface is created.

I dislike naming wireless interfaces eth%d, because I often plug in a
wired network card into my notebook at work, and a wireless card at
home. They would both get eth1, but I may want different

Also, 'private' names like ath%d are annyoing, because in the waproamd
package I have to care for all of these. And it does not make sense, all
wired ethernet devces get eth%d, so why do the wireless devices get
names depending on the driver?

It is possible to work around these issues, but using eth%d for wired
and wlan%d for wireless makes life a lot easier.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: