On Thu, 29.01.15 17:00, Daniel Ankers (md1...@md1clv.com) wrote: > The problem I see with this approach is that it allows bizarre > configurations to be specified which don't make sense in practice: > > e.g. 1 - Loop: > /etc/systemd/network/downlink0.network: > BindCarrier=uplink* > > /etc/systemd/network/uplink0.network: > BindCarrier=downlink* > > e.g. 2 - Chain > /etc/systemd/network/downlink0.network: > BindCarrier=uplink* > > /etc/systemd/network/uplink0.network: > BindCarrier=thirdlink*
I think this is not really an issue, since we'd bind the application of a .network file to the physical carrier sense of other interfaces, but not application of .network files to application of .network files. Since the the application of .network files and carrier sense are pretty much orthogonal creating a "loop" is not really doable, unless you actually involve physically or virtually looping back the carrier sense... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
