On Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:13:25 +0000 Dietmar Maurer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Also, I think I'm not the only to use this kind of setup, so > > proxmox users should be warned before doing the update. > > This change also scares me, really. Maybe I have problems understanding it all, but what is purpose of gvrp and what problems does it solve which cannot be solved with the current setup? If gvrp does not solve any real problems faced in todays setup I think it would be stupid to change things. As this thread has proved there is no migration path for every usecase of the current network configuration which means users will have expected downtime of service. -- Hilsen/Regards Michael Rasmussen Get my public GnuPG keys: michael <at> rasmussen <dot> cc http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xD3C9A00E mir <at> datanom <dot> net http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xE501F51C mir <at> miras <dot> org http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xE3E80917 -------------------------------------------------------------- Someone is speaking well of you.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list [email protected] http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
