On Fri, 2022-06-03 at 16:35 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> Some time ago I proposed some specific networking release criteria. I
> revived the thread back in February, and meeting discussion suggested
> we should be more intentional and specific about wifi requirements. So,
>
Adam Williamson wrote:
> DDG tells me that's an open source server intended to be compatible
> with openconnect clients, i.e. an open source alternative to the
> proprietary CISCO server.
It is also by far the easiest to set up Free Software VPN server.
It is configured through one configuration
On Mon, 2022-06-13 at 03:09 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Using the default network configuration tools for the console and for
> > release-blocking desktops, it must be possible to establish a working
> > connection to common OpenVPN, openconnect-supported and
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Using the default network configuration tools for the console and for
> release-blocking desktops, it must be possible to establish a working
> connection to common OpenVPN, openconnect-supported and vpnc-supported
> VPN servers with typical configurations.
Is "common" a
On 6/11/22 19:27, Petr Menšík wrote:
> Because of attitude documented in change for systemd-resolved [1], I
> expect the only change to get this improved would be switch from
> systemd-resolved to anything more DNSSEC friendly. I don't understand
> why, but it seems systemd team is avoiding
On Sun, 2022-06-12 at 01:27 +0200, Petr Menšík wrote:
> Because of attitude documented in change for systemd-resolved [1], I
> expect the only change to get this improved would be switch from
> systemd-resolved to anything more DNSSEC friendly. I don't understand
> why, but it seems systemd
Because of attitude documented in change for systemd-resolved [1], I
expect the only change to get this improved would be switch from
systemd-resolved to anything more DNSSEC friendly. I don't understand
why, but it seems systemd team is avoiding working DNSSEC as much as
they can. Yet it was
On Thu, 2022-06-09 at 19:50 +0200, Petr Menšík wrote:
> I would propose also ability keep DNSSEC validation passthru. If
> infrastructure provides cryptographic records, they should be available
> also on the installed host. Without extra modifications.
>
> Ie. if delv @$NS is validated for all
I would propose also ability keep DNSSEC validation passthru. If
infrastructure provides cryptographic records, they should be available
also on the installed host. Without extra modifications.
Ie. if delv @$NS is validated for all network DNS servers, then delv
should validate too. But that
Once upon a time, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden
said:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 04:35:41PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network connections
> >using both typical router-provided addressing systems (e.g. DHCP on
> >IPv4 or SLAAC or IPv6) and
On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 04:35:41PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network connections
using both typical router-provided addressing systems (e.g. DHCP on
IPv4 or SLAAC or IPv6) and static addressing.
I'd like to see clarification whether this
On Sat, Jun 4, 2022 at 1:36 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> Any more thoughts, comments, adjustments etc? Thanks!
>
Which milestone is this supposed to block? It sounds fine (to my networking
layman ears).
___
devel mailing list --
Sounds good to me.
On Sat, 4 Jun 2022, 01:25 Michael Catanzaro, wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3 2022 at 04:35:41 PM -0700, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > Using the default network configuration tools for the console and for
> > release-blocking desktops, it must be possible to establish a working
> >
On Fri, Jun 3 2022 at 04:35:41 PM -0700, Adam Williamson
wrote:
Using the default network configuration tools for the console and for
release-blocking desktops, it must be possible to establish a working
connection to common OpenVPN, openconnect-supported and vpnc-supported
VPN servers with
Hi folks!
Some time ago I proposed some specific networking release criteria. I
revived the thread back in February, and meeting discussion suggested
we should be more intentional and specific about wifi requirements. So,
looking at it again, I suggest adding an additional footnote:
Footnote
15 matches
Mail list logo
