On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 4:06 AM Till Maas <till(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hi Jarod,
we are currently exploring better names for the interfaces used in
bonding etc. for our network configuration tools in userspace.
Ideally, we would like to use the same words that the kernel will
eventually use. Since you started a discussion in
https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg668079.html I am wondering if
there is already some consensus about which words to use. You can find
our ideas in the quote. What are your thoughts?
No consensus just yet, though 'bundle' and 'cable' work quite well, I
think, both from a terminology standpoint and from being the same
number of characters as 'master' and 'slave', which makes replacement
a bit easier, aside from having to make adjustments for things like
'enslave'. Nobody had any objections to them, anyway. Some of this is
stalled waiting for me to experiment more with coccinelle, to try to
come up with a way to not make stable tree maintainers' lives hell
when backporting a fix from a tree w/renames to one without.
Am Mo., 24. Aug. 2020 um 09:58 Uhr schrieb Till Maas
<till(a)redhat.com>:
>
> Hi,
>
> Am Do., 13. Aug. 2020 um 17:06 Uhr schrieb Gris Ge <fge(a)redhat.com>:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to suggest we deprecate our use of `master/slave` in
> > nmstate project.
> >
> > And switching to these terminologies for interface relationship in
> > the coming new release of nmstate-0.4.0:
> >
> > * For bond/team/bridge:
> > * controller/subordinate
> > # For bridge, we can also use controller/port.
>
> having shorter words would be nice, maybe
>
> trunk/leg
> base/leg
>
> base/dell
> mesa/dell
> base/vale
>
> bulk/part
>
> >
> > * For VLAN/VxLAN:
> > * parent/child
> > * base/child
> > # Current API using `base-iface`, no need to change
>
> Some other suggestions:
> base/apex
> mesa/apex
>
> base/head
> trunk/head
>
>
> The trunk interface of eth1 is bond0
> eth1 is a leg of the bridge br0
> eth1 is a leg of an base interface
> eth1 is a dell interface of br0 (probably not so nice because of the
> confusion with the manufacturer)
> eth1 is a vale interface of br0
> eth1 is a limb of br0
> eth1 is a leg of br0
> br0 is the trunk for eth1
>
>
> eth1 is a part interface of the br0 bulk interface
>
>
> the base of VLAN eth1.100 is eth1
> eth1.100 is an apex interface of eth1
> eth1.100 is a head of eth1
> eth1 is the trunk interface for eth1.100.
> eth1 is the base interface for eth1.100.
> eth1 is the trunk for eth1.100
> eth1.100 is a limb of eth1
> eth1.100 is an arm of eth1
>
>
> These seem to be my current favorites:
> leg/trunk/head
> limb/trunk/limb
>
> Limb could be used both for the interfaces included in a bridge or a
> bond. Not sure, if they need to have different identifiers.
>
>
> >
> > For example:
> > * The `controller` of eth1 is bond0 and `controller_type` is bond
> > * The br0 is `controller` of eth1
> > * The eth1 is `port` of bridge br0 or `subordinate` of bridge br0
> > * The eth1 is `subordinate` of bond0
> > * The VLAN eth1.100 is child of eth1
> > * The base interface of eth1.100 is eth1
> > * The parent of VLAN eth1.100 is eth1
> > * The VLAN eth1.100 is child of eth1
> >
> > I am not English native speaker, please kindly help on this if you have
> > better ideas.
> >
> > Thank you very much!
>
> Thank you for moving this forward!
>
> Till
>
>
>
> --
> Till Maas
> He/His/Him
> Associate Manager, Software Engineering
> NetworkManager, Nmstate, Ansible RHEL Networking System Role
>
> Red Hat GmbH,
http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
> Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
> Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill,
> Thomas Savage
--
Till Maas
He/His/Him
Associate Manager, Software Engineering
NetworkManager, Nmstate, Ansible RHEL Networking System Role
Red Hat GmbH,
http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill,
Thomas Savage
--
Jarod Wilson
jarod(a)redhat.com