Hi, I second Hakan's thoughts and reasons for using NetworkManager going forward, as opposed to netplan. I work in a company which ships boat loads of network devices (think industrial routers, GSM gear, factory equipment) running a wide variety of Linux from Ubuntu, RHEL, Debian, etc. The way NetworkManager (including nmcli commands) interoperate seamlessly between RHEL land, SUSE, Arch, Gentoo and Ubuntu(maybe Debian) helps a lot with maintaining complex network appliances which run on everything with minimal effort. Think multiple VLANs on GSM connections, testbeds with hundreds of network namespaces (managed with NetworkManager), docker fleets with predictable network topology, etc. All of this is very much possible and reasonably well documented with NetworkManager+systemd-networkd. I also think using a system which most of Linux land already uses can potentially drive talent to maybe help with NetworkManager integration here. There's waay more knowledgeable people in NM land than in netplan in my opinion. On a more personal note, I enjoy using NetworkManager more than netplan as well, I find the syntax and nmcli way easier to use and harder to result in a borked network config. I also think my personal preference is of little importance, compared to my professional experience with both networking systems. > I’m a system administrator, and with my colleagues, we manage > approximately 1200 servers from physical installation to managing > users’ applications and everything in between. This includes network > design, wiring and implementation. > > To be honest, not of our fleet is completely Debian, but many are, > and I personally prefer to work with NetworkManager rather than > Netplan. The reasons are numerous. > Have a great one, Alexandru Mihail
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
