Why udev renamed network to

Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group. Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. Udev : renaming my network interface Ask Question.

Asked 8 years, 1 month ago. Active 2 years, 11 months ago. Viewed k times. In the dmesg log I can read the following : udev: renamed network interface eth1 to rename5 udev: renamed network interface eth0 to eth1 udev: renamed network interface rename5 to eth0 Any idea on what is wrong here? Improve this question. JamesThomasMoon 6 6 silver badges 18 18 bronze badges.

Hugo Hugo 2, 7 7 gold badges 22 22 silver badges 32 32 bronze badges. I've done similar thing for network interfaces and it shows just like that in the log if you follow the logic in it, it just assigns a bogus name to original eth1 so that it can rename original eth0 to eth1. So according to the log everything should be ok. Are you sure the names are not ok yet? Its like the changes I made in the file are not applied. What I understand is when kernel boot eth0 and eth1 are boot but udev switch them.

Have you found a solution? I am struggling with this problem too. On normal boot, I end up with p1p1 and p1p2. But since I have plugged a network cable on p1p2, on some boot not all, which is weird , I end up with p1p1 and rename3!?!?

Udev is renaming eth1 to rename3 instead of p1p2 for whatever reason. Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community. Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account. Unload the network module in my case cp , then load it again. Notice how the interface is properly renamed:. The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:. Sorry, something went wrong. Hmm, I wonder if this is intended effect of 55b Also see And of course Why it is named lan0 when the driver is loaded??

If, the final result is ens3 then I expect it should be always ens3. It's a udev rule that worked for years, it shouldn't suddenly stop working. So, the name was stayed at lan0. But, v, 55b makes the rule is always evaluated. If I remember correctly, the original motivation of the commit is that interface name can be changed by udev rules without updating initrd or changing kernel command line. So, if my above guess is correct,,, what should we do?

Files like default are named this way to have the lower priority. But there is no magic of "oh, this was set by the user, let's not touch it" anywhere.

The problem with trying to make a division like that is that nobody seems to ever agree what is "user" configuration, and what is "explicit". Current approach of simply executing the configuration as we find it is much clearer and sustainable. The rules in the bug report were relying on an implementation detail of the rule engine, and changing this implementation detail is something that we are allowed to do.

Current behaviour seems correct to me: when the device is called lan0 , there's just one rule that applies to the devices, and when udevadm trigger fires off, we execute all rules that apply. This is also much nicer for the user, because they can create configuration and apply it, without jumping through hoops to reset the state. It's not nicer to users, as it breaks existing user configurations. Which is bad. Not every facet of program behaviour is guaranteed to be stable.

Generally, only things that are documented are promised to be kept unchanged. Is the fact that link renames are applied only once documented anywhere? So much easier. How to migrate to this scheme on upgraded systems It's advisable to do this as a separate migration in its own right, not as part of a general distribution upgrade.

However, if your PC only has one network interface and not much is at stake you can try: Strategy A wait until udev breaks your networking, if it's going to, or trigger the change yourself.

One of these is the name that udev will give priority to - the list of candidates may be so short that all you need to know is that You'd think in a sane world we'd just ask for udevadm ifnames and it would list the interfaces it knows with their available names ordered by the priority policy currently in force But that would be too simple. The database is hardcoded into udev and has only one known entry, the spooky-sounding idrac. My theory is that the global vampire conspiracy set this up so that we've technically already invited them to cross the threshold.

Usually looks like ens0 or wls0. Note that all numbers are in hex. This further implies that any time you update systemd and reboot there's a chance your server might fall off the net, which seems like a good argument for using a customized scheme at least for the interface you're SSHing in on. Complications and corner cases Additions welcome, but please try to avoid ballooning this section with tales of "I don't know how this happened but it all went wrong for me" And on Debian 7 "wheezy" it probably just plain won't work, but should you really be connecting that to the Internet anyway?

Just renaming it e. Note that it is possible to have a mixed system with say an enp1s1 named from its hardware path alongside a wlan0 still defined as a "persistent" name.

The name-type kernel means something similar for interface names that have been "declared as persistent", but it's unclear what this is talking about. Are you sure you didn't do something about it the last time the subject came up, like setting up a net. If so, this may result in confusing symptoms when you try to go over to the new system.

Check your administrative logbooks.