On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 22:36 +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote: > It is definitely severity normal. I have already explained how it > works. Well you have explained that here, but this is nothing that a admin necessarily reads before upgrading... he would only read it once his stuff already starts to fail. So as along as the default is still to have allow-hotplug on eth interfaces (which is still the case, AFAIK) and as long as there is no NEWS.Debian entry or other measure to warn people that update their ifupdown, that it will likely fail with IPv6 and their current setup - the issue still fully exists and is therefore still as severe (namely critical) as it was on the first day. Justification: it breaks unrelated software
> If you want synchronous operation, don't use allow-hotplug. By > its definition, it means asynchronous, which means your servers can't > rely on those interfaces. Okay but as said before, I don't quite understand what hotplug means, respectively what async/sync means in this case? Does it mean that ifupdown brings the interface up once the link comes up, even if this is at a later point? But, still,... what's the appropriate solution? Shall we change the default from allow-hotplug to allow-auto? Shall we try to find a solution with systemd? Cheers, Chris.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
