Re: eth0 - eth1 confusion vs. local network

[Camaleón <noelamac@gmail.com>]

On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 10:41:46 -0800, Frank Miles wrote:

> Thanks, Camaleon (sorry - don't know how to generate the proper
> characters).

Still "us-ascii"? ;-) No problem.
 
> That file includes:
> 
> # PCI device 0x10ec:0x8168 (r8169)
> SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*",
> ATTR{address}=="xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0",
> ATTR{type}=="1", KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth0"
> 
> # PCI device 0x10b7:0x9050 (3c59x)
> SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*",
> ATTR{address}=="xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0",
> ATTR{type}=="1", KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth1"

Seems both are detected. Nothing strange here.
 
> On further checking, it may be that renaming is acceptable - in
> /var/log/messages:

(...)

> Perhaps the kernel brings eth1 into existence by first establishing it
> as eth0, then renaming it to eth1; then bringing the "real" eth0 into
> existence.

I fail to see what it's doing, but I cannot see any reference to "eth1", 
it's like only one interace is being recognized :-?

What is the output of "dmesg | grep eth"?
 
Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón