On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:37 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> So, uh, we sorta forgot about this. Kamil approved this draft, but
> nobody else gave any feedback on it. This topic is still relevant and
> we have a proposed VPN blocker today, so...any more feedback on this
> draft?
I think it's
On Fri, 2020-08-28 at 16:59 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Hi folks!
> >
> > So at this week's blocker review meeting, the fact that we don't have
> > explicit networking requirements in the release criteria really started
> > to bite
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:59 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Hi folks!
> >
> > So at this week's blocker review meeting, the fact that we don't have
> > explicit networking requirements in the release criteria really started
> > to bite
Pardon me for thread-breaking, I read in digest mode :)
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 16:56:26 -0700 wrote:
> > What about mDNS?
>
> ehhh
>
> I am probably a bit biased on this front because I always found mDNS to
> be a pile of garbage and gave up trying to use it a while back. :P But
> if a
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:57 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 10:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:11 PM Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Basic networking
> > >
> > > It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 4:34 AM Chris Murphy
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 7:52 PM Chris Murphy
> wrote:
>
> > The IPP Everywhere specification requires clients to support DNS-SD
> > (mDNS is part of that) or WS-Discovery. Printers are required to
> > support both DNS-SD and WS-Discovery.
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 7:52 pm, Chris Murphy
wrote:
Between avahi and systemd-resolved, I'm not sure which one is more
dependable for blocking on. Or whether their maintainers would be on
board with such a criterion. At least for F33, Avahi is what we're
using on desktops for this. Both
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 7:52 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
> The IPP Everywhere specification requires clients to support DNS-SD
> (mDNS is part of that) or WS-Discovery. Printers are required to
> support both DNS-SD and WS-Discovery. Avahi and systemd-resolved
> support DNS-SD, functionally equating
[Sorry for the double post, somewhere along the way desktop@ and kde@
were dropped, so I'm re-adding them and that means double post for
test@ and devel@.]
Re: add working mDNS to the criterion
The IPP Everywhere specification requires clients to support DNS-SD
(mDNS is part of that) or
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 5:56 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 10:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:11 PM Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Basic networking
> > >
> > > It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network
On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
> So at this week's blocker review meeting, the fact that we don't have
> explicit networking requirements in the release criteria really started
> to bite us. In the past we have squeezed networking-related issues in
> under
On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 10:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:11 PM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> >
> > Basic networking
> >
> > It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network connections
> > using DHCP and static addressing. The default network
On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 01:14 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:51 PM Michel Alexandre Salim
> wrote:
>
> > Also, should we add WireGuard to this list for future-proofing?
>
> I had thought about explicitly suggesting
> wireguard, but then thought that we should
> focus
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 6:11 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> Basic networking
>
> It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network connections
> using DHCP and static addressing. The default network configuration
> tools for the console and for release-blocking desktops must
On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 21:20 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 8:33 PM Michael Catanzaro <
> mcatanz...@gnome.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 4:11 pm, Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> > > Do NetworkManager and its current KDE and GNOME front ends
> > > support it
> > >
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 8:33 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 4:11 pm, Adam Williamson
> wrote:
> > Do NetworkManager and its current KDE and GNOME front ends support it
> > currently?
>
> Rumor has it that KDE has this working!
The rumor is true! WireGuard has been
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:51 PM Michel Alexandre Salim
wrote:
> Also, should we add WireGuard to this list for future-proofing?
I had thought about explicitly suggesting
wireguard, but then thought that we should
focus on what is currently being used, and
while *I* use wireguard, it is still
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 4:11 pm, Adam Williamson
wrote:
Do NetworkManager and its current KDE and GNOME front ends support it
currently?
Rumor has it that KDE has this working! But GNOME doesn't support it
yet. Help welcome in these bugs:
On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 16:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 15:50 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > VPN connections
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Using the default network configuration tools for
On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 15:50 -0700, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > VPN connections
> >
> >
> >
> > Using the default network configuration tools for the console and for
> >
> > release-blocking desktops, it must be
On Fri, 2020-08-21 at 17:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> VPN connections
>
>
>
> 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
On Sat, 2020-08-22 at 00:23 +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 12:12 AM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> > It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network connections
> > using DHCP and static addressing.
>
> For IPV6, SLAAC is more common than DHCP(v6)
>
On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 12:12 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
> It must be possible to establish both IPv4 and IPv6 network connections
> using DHCP and static addressing.
For IPV6, SLAAC is more common than DHCP(v6)
(especially) in the consumer space. I would like
to see a SLAAC requirement be
Hi folks!
So at this week's blocker review meeting, the fact that we don't have
explicit networking requirements in the release criteria really started
to bite us. In the past we have squeezed networking-related issues in
under other criteria, but for some issues that's really difficult,
notably
24 matches
Mail list logo
