Re: nic enumeration

Steve Fink
2010-07-09T21:26:34Z

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 11:23 AM, Loke, Chetan <Chetan.Loke@netscout.com> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Steve Fink [mailto:sphink@gmail.com]
>>
>> Soft (symbolic)
>> links are a filesystem concept, implemented by filesystem-specific
>> logic that knows how to read a filename out of an inode and restart
>> lookup. In order for something similar to work for network devices,
>> somebody would have had to explicitly implement similar functionality.
>> (Symlinks are a big headache and source of security holes -- access
>> control, loops, pointing to nonexistent files, etc. -- so there's a
>> good reason to NOT have an equivalent for network devices.)
>>
>
> Huh? If the 'ethX' interface doesn't exist just don't create the 'link'.
> So are you saying there are no security issues with udev-symlinks for
> other subsystems? Why is renaming allowed on the network-interface then?
> Isn't that a problem? I don't see the driver re-registering their RX/TX
> queues with the new-if-name.

The issues are different between network device and filesystem names,
yes. I was just saying that symbolic linking / aliasing are tricky.
udev symlinks introduce no *new* security issues because they're
filesystem links. Renaming the network interface certainly does cause
problems. And I don't know how the queues are connected to the devices
internally, but I doubt it's by name.

> May be I'm overlooking at something really obvious. But how are people
> managing [pv]drivers with multiple vNICs in their VMs if they need a
> consistent naming scheme?

Your problem is different from the one that began this thread. Can you
describe your situation more fully?

I only partially understand your problem, but I am still wondering if
my bridge idea would work for you. (Preferably combined with udev
rules or whatever so the bridges are unnecessary after the next
reboot.)