On 17.03.2014 22:32, Tom Gundersen wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Henrik /KaarPoSoft
hen...@kaarposoft.dk wrote:
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your feedback...
I was briefly looking through git commits after 211 without finding anything
related. But then again I did not look into too much
Am 21.02.2014 04:41, schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 04:00:10AM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
systemd-networkd seems to get started by default in 209. Why is this?
What if I don't want to use it to manage my networks? Why does it have
to be on by default?
I
I agree with Harald.
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
'Twas brillig, and Reindl Harald at 21/02/14 08:45 did gyre and gimble:
Am 21.02.2014 04:41, schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 04:00:10AM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
systemd-networkd seems to get started by default in 209. Why is this?
What if I don't want
Am 21.02.2014 16:44, schrieb Colin Guthrie:
'Twas brillig, and Reindl Harald at 21/02/14 08:45 did gyre and gimble:
Am 21.02.2014 04:41, schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 04:00:10AM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
systemd-networkd seems to get started by default
On Fri, 21.02.14 15:44, Colin Guthrie (gm...@colin.guthr.ie) wrote:
'Twas brillig, and Reindl Harald at 21/02/14 08:45 did gyre and gimble:
Am 21.02.2014 04:41, schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 04:00:10AM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
systemd-networkd
On Fri, 21.02.14 16:51, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote:
Well I kinda get that using it for containers and such like could be
useful, but I also suspect it should be bus or socket activated rather
than statically enabled... like localed, datetimed etc. Any reason to
enable it
Hi folks,
systemd-networkd seems to get started by default in 209. Why is this?
What if I don't want to use it to manage my networks? Why does it have
to be on by default?
Jason
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
-Original Message-
From: systemd-devel-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org [mailto:systemd-
devel-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Zbigniew Jedrzejewski-
Szmek
Sent: den 21 februari 2014 04:42
To: Jason A. Donenfeld
Cc: systemd Mailing List
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Oleksii Shevchuk alx...@gmail.com wrote:
So, I try to use VLANs feature introduced to systemd-networkd/git two
weeks ago (54abf461d6b10dc270c4bb2aeac65f240ff1c5cd).
I want to have next layout:
Links:
1. Eth
1.1 Vlan1
1.2 Vlan2 (Ring1)
2. Bridge (Ring0)
Hello, list.
So, I try to use VLANs feature introduced to systemd-networkd/git two
weeks ago (54abf461d6b10dc270c4bb2aeac65f240ff1c5cd).
I want to have next layout:
Links:
1. Eth
1.1 Vlan1
1.2 Vlan2 (Ring1)
2. Bridge (Ring0)
2.1 Vlan2
Networks:
1. Vlan1
2. Bridge
So, I try next configs:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog
umut.tezdu...@axis.com wrote:
I would think port access protocols would be needed for servers even before
sending a single IP package.
I've never used a server that required 802.1x. I've only encountered
it in places where physical
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 06:20:09PM +1000, David Timothy Strauss wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog
umut.tezdu...@axis.com wrote:
I would think port access protocols would be needed for servers even before
sending a single IP package.
I've never used a server
Hi,
Are there any plans to support 802.1x by systemd-networkd?
Thanks
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog
umut.tezdu...@axis.com wrote:
Are there any plans to support 802.1x by systemd-networkd?
To the best of my knowledge no one is working on it now, nor planning
on working on it any time soon. However, it would be within the scope
of
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your answer. It seems like bunch of other protocol supports are
being asked too. Maybe we could have a page on what protocols are supported,
will be supported and in which priority they will be implemented.
I would think port access protocols would be needed for servers even
Tom Gundersen (t...@jklm.no) said:
Without criticizing any of the existing solutions, some of the things
that motivated my interest in this is that I think we need: something
easily configured via plain configuration files by a sysadmin,
something that would take a limited amount of space
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com wrote:
Tom Gundersen (t...@jklm.no) said:
Without criticizing any of the existing solutions, some of the things
that motivated my interest in this is that I think we need: something
easily configured via plain configuration
On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 23:19 +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
Hi Dan,
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:38 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
1) what is lacking in other userspace solutions (NetworkManager,
ConnMan, wicked, initscripts, etc) that requires
yet-another-network-daemon?
Without
Hi,
On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 17:39 +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
I'm sure I would like avoid that :) Hopefully we'll be able to reuse
the dhcp client from connman, but as the work of converting that into
a library has not yet finished I don't know yet exactly how that will
work out.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Patrik Flykt
patrik.fl...@linux.intel.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 17:39 +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote:
I'm sure I would like avoid that :) Hopefully we'll be able to reuse
the dhcp client from connman, but as the work of converting that into
Hi Bill,
Without criticizing any of the existing solutions, some of the things
that motivated my interest in this is that I think we need: something
easily configured via plain configuration files by a sysadmin,
something that would take a limited amount of space (including its
dependencies)
Hi,
Having watched the discussion over the past week or so, I'm left with a
few questions:
1) what is lacking in other userspace solutions (NetworkManager,
ConnMan, wicked, initscripts, etc) that requires
yet-another-network-daemon?
2) do you expect that systemd-networkd will grow to include
Hi Dan,
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:38 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
1) what is lacking in other userspace solutions (NetworkManager,
ConnMan, wicked, initscripts, etc) that requires
yet-another-network-daemon?
Without criticizing any of the existing solutions, some of the things
Hi Dan,
- Original Message -
Hi,
Having watched the discussion over the past week or so, I'm left with a
few questions:
1) what is lacking in other userspace solutions (NetworkManager,
ConnMan, wicked, initscripts, etc) that requires
yet-another-network-daemon?
2) do you
sorry for double post after bounce and the huge signature,
messed up my mail client config a bit..
Holger
We asked our self the same questions, and alternatives exists even from
the embedded camp [1] which often comes close to the server use case.
Even if [1] does not have a Dbus interface,
301 - 326 of 326 matches
Mail list logo
