On Thu, 2022-05-12 at 18:41 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mo, 09.05.22 19:27, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
>
> > FWIW, I still think it's a better _default_. The patch that finally
> > introduced this was my patch [1], so I'm obviously biased… Some
> > more
> >
On Thu, 12 May 2022 14:36:44 -0400
Dan Streetman wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 2:27 PM Dan Streetman wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 1:50 PM Dusty Mabe wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/12/22 13:36, Dan Streetman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:11 AM Thomas Haller
>
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 2:27 PM Dan Streetman wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 1:50 PM Dusty Mabe wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 5/12/22 13:36, Dan Streetman wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:11 AM Thomas Haller wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Zbyszek,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I must say, I
On Thu, 2022-05-12 at 13:36 -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:11 AM Thomas Haller
> wrote:
> >
> > Either
> >
> > - a user doesn't care about the MAC address,
>
> note that it's possible for a user not to care about the *specific*
> mac address, only that they want the
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 1:50 PM Dusty Mabe wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/12/22 13:36, Dan Streetman wrote:
> > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:11 AM Thomas Haller wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Zbyszek,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I must say, I personally don't care too much. NetworkManager is fine
> >> either way.
> >>
> >>
On 5/12/22 13:36, Dan Streetman wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:11 AM Thomas Haller wrote:
>>
>> Hi Zbyszek,
>>
>>
>>
>> I must say, I personally don't care too much. NetworkManager is fine
>> either way.
>>
>> There is however the problem about RHEL8/9, which patches this
>> downstream. I
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 11:11 AM Thomas Haller wrote:
>
> Hi Zbyszek,
>
>
>
> I must say, I personally don't care too much. NetworkManager is fine
> either way.
>
> There is however the problem about RHEL8/9, which patches this
> downstream. I don't like that deviation, but I'd also be
On 5/12/22 12:43, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mo, 09.05.22 22:37, Dusty Mabe (du...@dustymabe.com) wrote:
>
>>> This is true. But one can just as well argument that with
>>> MACAddressPolicy=persistent the address is even more predictable. If
>>> you know the machine-id and device name, you
On Mo, 09.05.22 22:37, Dusty Mabe (du...@dustymabe.com) wrote:
> > This is true. But one can just as well argument that with
> > MACAddressPolicy=persistent the address is even more predictable. If
> > you know the machine-id and device name, you can calculate the address
> > in advance, even
On Mo, 09.05.22 19:27, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> FWIW, I still think it's a better _default_. The patch that finally
> introduced this was my patch [1], so I'm obviously biased… Some more
> considerations:
I agree with this.
Finding good defaults is always
On Thu, 2022-05-12 at 17:11 +0200, Thomas Haller wrote:
> We are talking here about software device which are always created by
> some tool/software/user. Presumably that creator has plans for this
> interface, and it's not clear why udev is supposed to change such a
> fundamental setting.
I
Hi Zbyszek,
I must say, I personally don't care too much. NetworkManager is fine
either way.
There is however the problem about RHEL8/9, which patches this
downstream. I don't like that deviation, but I'd also be uncomfortable
to push that change for RHEL(10) users.
But let me play devil's
> 1) for bridge/bond interfaces, there is a special meaning of leaving
> the MAC address unassigned. It causes kernel to automatically set the
> MAC address when the first port gets attached. By setting a persistent
> MAC address, that automatism is not longer possible.
This is incredibly
On 5/9/22 13:27, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 03:57:21PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> On Mo, 09.05.22 11:23, Thomas Haller (thal...@redhat.com) wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everybody,
>>>
>>> this email is for discussing MACAddressPolicy=persistent in
>>>
On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 03:57:21PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mo, 09.05.22 11:23, Thomas Haller (thal...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > this email is for discussing MACAddressPolicy=persistent in
> > /data/src/systemd/network/99-default.link
>
> I think this would be
On Mo, 09.05.22 11:23, Thomas Haller (thal...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> this email is for discussing MACAddressPolicy=persistent in
> /data/src/systemd/network/99-default.link
I think this would be better discussed on a new github issue, as
suggested here:
Hi everybody,
this email is for discussing MACAddressPolicy=persistent in
/data/src/systemd/network/99-default.link
there is a Fedora CoreOS issue about this:
[1] https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/919
Since systemd 242 (Apr 2019), this policy applies to more device types
17 matches
Mail list logo
