[CentOS] Traditional network interface naming scheme vs. persistent naming

Hi,

I'm currently experimenting with CentOS 7 in order to get a grasp of 
everything that's new.

After having read the FAQ entry on network interface names, I decided to 
revert to the tradictional interface naming scheme by adding the 
relevant kernel options to the bootloader. This went well, I have now 
two interfaces names 'eth0' and 'eth1' as expected.

In my office I have another server with two network interface cards, 
running Slackware64 14.1. On a stock Slackware installation, as soon as 
there is more than one NIC, the system creates a file 
/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules, which looks like this:

  # PCI device 0x8086:/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:02.0/0000:02:00.0 
(e1000e)
SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*", 
ATTR{address}=="2c:27:d7:15:54:a1", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0", 
ATTR{type}=="1", KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth0"

# PCI device 0x8086:/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:04.0/0000:03:00.0 
(e1000e)
SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*", 
ATTR{address}=="00:22:64:8a:4c:c2", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0", 
ATTR{type}=="1", KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth1"

Usually I have a 50 % chance of getting the network interface right 
(well, according to Murphy, I have more like a 100 % chance of getting 
it wrong the first time :oD). In that case, I simple edit the 
70-persistent-net.rules file, permutate the "eth0" and "eth1" entries 
and then reboot.

How would I go about that under CentOS with traditional interface names? 
The 70-persistent-net.rules file doesn't exist. Do I have to create it 
from scratch?

Cheers,

Niki Kovacs
-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques 100% Linux et logiciels libres
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Web  : http://www.microlinux.fr
Mail : info at microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32