On Thu, 29.01.15 11:20, Rauta, Alin (alin.ra...@intel.com) wrote: heya,
> Regarding the "networkctl" update to show the UFD groups in a user > friendly fashion, what about that ? Well, I am not particularly convinced we should expose the concept of an "UFD group" at all. However, I think it would make a ton of sense to show which interfaces are downlinks to an uplink interface, and which interface is an uplink for a downlink interface, all based on the relation expressed with BindCarrier=. > # networkctl ufd 1 > ● UFD Group: 1 > State: configured > Uplinks: > → 12: sw0p10 > Downlinks: > → 51: sw0p49 > → 53: sw0p51 > → 7: sw0p5 > → 9: sw0p7 For this example, I think networkctl should show: # networkctl status sw0p10 ... Carrier Bound By: sw0p49 sw0p51 sw0p5 sw0p7 ... # netwokctl status sw0p49 ... Carrier Bound To: sw0p10 ... If that makes sense? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel