netdev - Re: [RFC] longer netdev names proposal

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190628114212.GE29149@unicorn.suse.cz>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:42:12 +0200
From:   Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        davem@...emloft.net, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com,
        mlxsw@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] longer netdev names proposal

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 01:12:16PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> 
> I think that it is desired for kernel to work with "real alias" as a
> handle. Userspace could either pass ifindex, IFLA_NAME or "real alias".
> Userspace mapping like you did here might be perhaps okay for iproute2,
> but I think that we need something and easy to use for all.
> 
> Let's call it "altname". Get would return:
> 
> IFLA_NAME  eth0
> IFLA_ALT_NAME_LIST
>    IFLA_ALT_NAME  eth0
>    IFLA_ALT_NAME  somethingelse
>    IFLA_ALT_NAME  somenamethatisreallylong
> 
> then userspace would pass with a request (get/set/del):
> IFLA_ALT_NAME eth0/somethingelse/somenamethatisreallylong
> or
> IFLA_NAME eth0 if it is talking with older kernel
> 
> Then following would do exactly the same:
> ip link set eth0 addr 11:22:33:44:55:66
> ip link set somethingelse addr 11:22:33:44:55:66
> ip link set somenamethatisreallylong addr 11:22:33:44:55:66

Yes, this sounds nice.

> We would have to figure out the iproute2 iface to add/del altnames:
> ip link add eth0 altname somethingelse
> ip link del eth0 altname somethingelse
>   this might be also:
>   ip link del somethingelse altname somethingelse

This would be a bit confusing, IMHO, as so far

  ip link add $name ...

always means we want to add or delete new device $name which would not
be the case here. How about the other way around:

  ip link add somethingelse altname_for eth0

(preferrably with a better keyword than "altname_for" :-) ). Or maybe

  ip altname add somethingelse dev eth0
  ip altname del somethingelse dev eth0

Michal