Re: eth0 - eth1 confusion vs. local network

[Frank Miles <fpm@u.washington.edu>]

[snip]

> 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"?

[    6.317161] eth1: RTL8168d/8111d at 0xffffc90000c4e000, xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx, XID 083000c0 IRQ 32
[    6.384830] eth1: unable to apply firmware patch
[    7.190453] udev: renamed network interface eth1 to eth0
[    7.229390] udev: renamed network interface eth0_rename to eth1
[   11.276999] r8169: eth0: link up
[   11.277005] r8169: eth0: link up
[   12.215716] eth1:  setting full-duplex.
[   21.531029] eth0: no IPv6 routers present
[   22.599867] eth1: no IPv6 routers present

Again, eth1 is working fine; eth0 seems completely blocked/nonfunctional,
despite all the configuration files and netstats looking fine.

I made a minor effort earlier to suppress the IPv6 modules, but [a] didn't
succeed; and [b] hadn't suppressed them earlier with the one-interface 
system so wasn't convinced it was worth trying - why shouldn't this cause
eth1 to quit as well as eth0?  Also the previous system showed some
indications of IPv6 in its reports, and it worked fine.

	Thanks,
	-Frank