Minimal install diff from F16 to F19 (TC6)

[Bill Nottingham]

Pavel Simerda (psimerda at redhat.com) said: 
> > From: "Chris Adams" <linux at cmadams.net>
> > I prefer the "modern" secondaries vs. the old-style eth0:123, although I
> > have run into vendor software (such as the Plesk web hosting control
> > panel) that can't handle it.  I expect if that was the "one true way" in
> > some future version of RHEL, they'd adapt.
> 
> AFAIK with the current kernels, the only difference between aliased and
> non-aliased secondary addresses is Netlink's 'label' attribute.  If you
> want to add an address that would be seen through the alias API, you just
> need to assign it a label.  With libnl3 (used by NetworkManager), this is
> a matter of computing it and assigning it via rtnl_link_set_label(). 
> Currently we don't do that, as this for us this is unnecessary overhead,
> and as there is no known demand for it and also because the new-style
> multiple address API have been available for years.

Yeah - we have support for the label attribute in initscripts for backwards
compatibility with ifconfig/prior configuration, but we use ip/netlink for
all configuration.

Bill