Re: [Xen-devel] [patch] xen udev rule interfering with openvpn

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [patch] xen udev rule interfering with 
openvpn"):
> So for vifname="foo" it is a no-brainer to call the vif "foo" and the
> emulated tap device "foo-emu".
> 
> But what about the case where no vifname is given, in that case vif is
> named "vif<DOM>.<DEV>". But what to call the tap? Previously I was
> changing the name from tap<DOM>.<DEV> to xentap<DOM>.<DEV> but perhaps
> now "vif<DOM>.<DEV>-emu" makes more sense/is more consistent?

I think either is fine.  While we're changing it it probably makes
sense to use "vif..." as indeed it is more consistent.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel