Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)

From	Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)
Date	2016-01-07 03:00 +0100
Message-ID	<qO81R-11M-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <qM6GS-2hD-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <qMaKv-4Lm-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <qMxe1-1Xr-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <qNVR0-1e8-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qNWN5-1SF-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On 2016-01-06 13:55:45 +0000, Brian wrote:
> On Wed 06 Jan 2016 at 13:56:57 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> 
> > On 2016-01-02 16:21:11 +0000, Brian wrote:
> > > 
> > > Move 70-persistent-net.rules somewhere and do
> > > 
> > >   rmmod -v <driver>
> > > 
> > > followed by
> > > 
> > >   modprobe -v <driver>
> > > 
> > > Repeat with 70-persistent-net.rules returned to /etc/udev/rules.d. Any
> > > changes in 'ls /sys/class/net/'?
> > 
> > Well, I want to keep eth0 on my laptop because I have things
> > that depend on it. But what I was wondering is why I have
> > wlp61s0 instead of wlan0, i.e. why a rule for wlan0 hadn't
> > been added to 70-persistent-net.rules at that time.
> 
> Did the wireless interface name change using the above procedure?

After moving 70-persistent-net.rules:

# rmmod -v iwlmvm
# rmmod -v iwlwifi
# rmmod -v e1000e
# ls /sys/class/net/
lo
# modprobe -v e1000e
insmod /lib/modules/4.3.0-1-amd64/kernel/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/e1000e.ko
# modprobe -v iwlwifi
insmod /lib/modules/4.3.0-1-amd64/kernel/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwlwifi.ko
# ls /sys/class/net/
enp0s25  lo  wlp61s0

And repeating the procedure with 70-persistent-net.rules:

[...]
# ls /sys/class/net/
eth0  lo  wlp61s0

BTW, after doing that, I had to kill the DHCP client manually because when
the eth0 interface became up again, it didn't get an IPv4 address.

> Custom interface naming can be done with a file in /etc/udev/rules.d.
> What is the content of yours? The udev README.Debian advises a prefix
> between 75 and 80 for this file.

70-persistent-net.rules contains:

SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*", ATTR{address}=="30:8d:99:25:ad:3f", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0", ATTR{type}=="1", KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth0"

Still the same question: why eth0 only?

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Thread

Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2015-12-29 19:40 +0100
  Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2015-12-29 19:50 +0100
  Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2015-12-29 20:20 +0100
    Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2015-12-29 21:00 +0100
      Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2015-12-29 22:30 +0100
      Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2015-12-29 22:40 +0100
      Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@web.de> - 2015-12-30 13:00 +0100
        Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2015-12-30 15:40 +0100
          Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-12-30 16:00 +0100
            Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2015-12-30 16:20 +0100
        Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2015-12-30 16:20 +0100
          Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2015-12-31 16:30 +0100
            Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2015-12-31 19:10 +0100
              Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-01-01 13:10 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2016-01-01 17:30 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-01-02 17:30 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2016-01-06 14:00 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-01-06 15:00 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2016-01-07 03:00 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Rick Thomas <rbthomas@pobox.com> - 2016-01-07 07:20 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2016-01-07 10:50 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-01-07 14:20 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-01-07 19:50 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2016-01-08 02:40 +0100
                Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try) Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-01-08 13:10 +0100
          MAC address and security (was: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 (second try)) Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2015-12-31 16:50 +0100
            Re: MAC address and security Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de> - 2015-12-31 23:20 +0100
  Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> - 2015-12-29 20:20 +0100
  Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2015-12-31 22:20 +0100
    Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Hans <hans.ullrich@loop.de> - 2015-12-31 22:30 +0100
    Re: Question: eth0 vs enp1s0 Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-01-02 17:30 +0100

csiph-web