Bug 842450

Summary: inconsistent network naming - enp13s0 and eth1 ?
Product: [openSUSE] openSUSE Tumbleweed Reporter: Per Jessen <per>
Component: InstallationAssignee: E-mail List <bnc-team-screening>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Jiri Srain <jsrain>
Severity: Normal    
Priority: P5 - None CC: hws, werner
Version: 13.1 Beta 1   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: Other   
OS: Other   
Whiteboard:
Found By: --- Services Priority:
Business Priority: Blocker: ---
Marketing QA Status: --- IT Deployment: ---

Description Per Jessen 2013-09-26 08:14:23 UTC
User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/11.0

Hardware:   taggart24, 1u zattoo box, dual-core, 1Gb memory, dual GiGE.
Software:   opensuse 13.1 beta1, 64bit
Process:    installation+boot over pxe+iscsi

On the first boot-up, I see the following network config:

# ip addr
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN
    link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
    inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
    inet6 ::1/128 scope host
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
2: enp13s0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000
    link/ether 00:30:48:92:f3:1c brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet6 fe80::230:48ff:fe92:f31c/64 scope link
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000
    link/ether 00:30:48:92:f3:1d brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet 10.42.8.110/21 brd 10.42.15.255 scope global eth1
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
    inet6 fe80::230:48ff:fe92:f31d/64 scope link
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

According to dmesg, the system initially had eth0 and eth1, and eth0 was then later renamed to enp13s0.  Why wasn't eth1 renamed too?  Remarkably, the network config is called "ifcfg-enp14s0".

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Per Jessen 2013-09-26 08:16:27 UTC
This is probably related - despite eth1/enp14s0 being configured with dhcp4, /etc/resolv.conf was not created.  I'm guessing this is because no dhcp was started as interface enp14s0 doesn't exist.
Comment 2 Per Jessen 2013-09-26 08:22:52 UTC
Also probably related, but feel free to ask me to open another report - after calling /usr/lib/yast/startup/yast2.ssh, I disabled the firewall and continued. I left both network interfaces untouched, one with dhcp4, the other unconfigured. I was surprised to see a config file for the _unconfigured_ interface:

# cat /etc/sysconfig/network/ifcfg-enp13s0
BOOTPROTO='dhcp'
BROADCAST=''
ETHTOOL_OPTIONS=''
IPADDR=''
MTU=''
NAME='82573E Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper)'
NETMASK=''
NETWORK=''
REMOTE_IPADDR=''
STARTMODE='nfsroot'
USERCONTROL='no'
Comment 3 Humberto Sachs 2013-09-27 19:00:30 UTC
I cannot verify this bug: installed suse 13.1 on two computers, this Dell T7400 and a Dell Inspiron One. Have tested for wireless and wired.  I changed the computer ID with YaST and both Ethernet options are available, wired as eth0 and the wireless with the assigned netgear designation.
Comment 4 Per Jessen 2013-09-28 06:50:07 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> I cannot verify this bug: installed suse 13.1 on two computers, this Dell T7400
> and a Dell Inspiron One. Have tested for wireless and wired.  I changed the
> computer ID with YaST and both Ethernet options are available, wired as eth0
> and the wireless with the assigned netgear designation.

Are your systems booting from network disks (iSCSI, NFS) ?  I suspect the issue is that devices active before systemd are not properly renamed.
Comment 5 Humberto Sachs 2013-09-28 15:21:32 UTC
I guess my comment was not clear. I could not verify the bug thus maybe there is no bug. My installation worked fine. I am suggesting that we close this bug. 
And you right, some Ethernet requires a certain designation or name, thus the name change.
Comment 6 Per Jessen 2013-09-29 08:41:12 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> I guess my comment was not clear. I could not verify the bug thus maybe there
> is no bug. My installation worked fine. I am suggesting that we close this bug. 

Humberto, I wonder if you could not reproduce because you don't have the correct environment to test with. Did you or did you not boot from a network-attached (iSCSI or NFS) root filesystem? 

Also, in general, just because an arbitrary individual cannot reproduce a particular bug does not mean there is no bug.

Besides, on another reboot, none of the interfaces were renamed, I currently have eth0 and eth1.  The new renaming scheme is a bit of mess, methinks.
Comment 7 Per Jessen 2013-09-29 10:31:33 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> Besides, on another reboot, none of the interfaces were renamed, I currently
> have eth0 and eth1.  The new renaming scheme is a bit of mess, methinks.

Please ignore the above.
Comment 8 Per Jessen 2013-10-01 09:02:04 UTC
This is duplicate of 820407 which I opened back in May on 13.1m1

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 820407 ***