Lukas Märdian writes:
> On 04.09.24 17:26, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> Do we even have general documentation about configuring networking?
>
> Yes, there is a "NetworkConfiguration" page on the wiki and the Debian ref:
>
> * https://wiki.debian.org/NetworkConfiguration
I dont thinj this page is usefu
Dear Lukas and All,
From my perspective, Netplan is a great add-on for homogenizing network
management in the cloud, which requires simple to semi-complicated network
needs, especially with heterogenous OS fleets. However, for many ways, Netplan
is not a great default to begin with, since it’s
On Thu, 5 Sep 2024 14:48:49 +0200, Lukas Märdian
wrote:
>But for the
>release where we switch our network stack, we should definitely keep it
>around, to give sysadmins some time to adopt to the new recommended tooling.
Or to keep the old tooling, yes. Te default is a default for new
installs. As
On 04.09.24 21:41, Daniel Baumann wrote:
sorry, one more..
On 9/4/24 18:00, Lukas Märdian wrote:
But we ought to look at the bigger picture!
From that point of view, it doesn't make sense to even consider netplan.
No distribution other than ubuntu is using it.
If Debian uses network-manage
On 05.09.24 11:36, Daniel Baumann wrote:
On 9/5/24 10:43, Marc Haber wrote:
I don't see a problem with keeping ifupdown{2,-ng,} if none of those
packages is part of the default install and we remove it from the
beginner- and intermediate-level docs.
right, me neither; but Lukas' argument was t
On 9/5/24 10:43, Marc Haber wrote:
> I don't see a problem with keeping ifupdown{2,-ng,} if none of those
> packages is part of the default install and we remove it from the
> beginner- and intermediate-level docs.
right, me neither; but Lukas' argument was that introducing netplan is
"unifying do
On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 21:29:58 +0200, Daniel Baumann
wrote:
>"wild idea": how about just removing ifupdown/ifupdown2/ifupdown-ng and
>decluttering/improving documentation instead then?
I don't see a problem with keeping ifupdown{2,-ng,} if none of those
packages is part of the default install and we
sorry, one more..
On 9/4/24 18:00, Lukas Märdian wrote:
> But we ought to look at the bigger picture!
>From that point of view, it doesn't make sense to even consider netplan.
No distribution other than ubuntu is using it.
If Debian uses network-manager and systemd-networkd, there's hardly any
d
On 9/4/24 18:00, Lukas Märdian wrote:
>> Of course we could. But who would actually care?
>
> That's exactly the problem!
I don't think so. I still have the impression that netplan wants to fill
a whole where in reality there's none.
In my experience networking from a systems point of view has d
On 2024-09-04 08:03, Lukas Märdian wrote:
Hi all!
On 04.09.24 15:46, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 11:27:45 +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler
wrote:
* Marco d'Itri [240903 14:04]:
My position is that I am happy for Debian to have the option of netplan
but I do not think that it should be ins
On 9/4/24 17:49, Lukas Märdian wrote:
> Netplan is for the average user who googles about "how to configure network
> on debian" and ends up with the "4 ways to configure the network"
> [4ways] or
> even more options in the Debian Reference [debref]:
so, to exaggerate on purpose, netplan is only t
Lukas Märdian writes:
> But in the end we don't want to bloat our base-installation with
> NetworkManager and systemd-networkd is not fit to cover the desktop/laptop
> usecase. So why not put some glue around it, to make it all feel coherent,
> without limiting anybody in their decision to choose
On 04.09.24 17:26, Marco d'Itri wrote:
With Netplan we could provide coherent network configuration across all
variants of Debian (server, cloud, laptop, ...), while choosing the best
underlying stack for the usecase (i.e. systemd-networkd on server/cloud
and NetworkManager on desktop/laptop).
O
On 04.09.24 13:28, Daniel Baumann wrote:
On 9/3/24 18:24, Lukas Märdian wrote:
The nice thing about Netplan is that it [...] functions as a
layer on top.
I don't understand what actual problem netplan is trying to solve.
On servers I want systemd-networkd directly anyway (for lacp, vlan and
b
On Sep 04, Lukas Märdian wrote:
> With Netplan we could provide coherent network configuration across all
> variants of Debian (server, cloud, laptop, ...), while choosing the best
> underlying stack for the usecase (i.e. systemd-networkd on server/cloud
> and NetworkManager on desktop/laptop).
O
Hi all!
On 04.09.24 15:46, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 11:27:45 +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler
wrote:
* Marco d'Itri [240903 14:04]:
My position is that I am happy for Debian to have the option of netplan
but I do not think that it should be installed by default, because it is
an abstrac
Quoting Marc Haber (2024-09-04 15:43:15)
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 13:28:30 +0200, Daniel Baumann
> wrote:
> >On 9/3/24 18:24, Lukas Märdian wrote:
> >> The nice thing about Netplan is that it [...] functions as a
> >> layer on top.
> >
> >I don't understand what actual problem netplan is trying to sol
On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 11:27:45 +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler
wrote:
>* Marco d'Itri [240903 14:04]:
>> My position is that I am happy for Debian to have the option of netplan
>> but I do not think that it should be installed by default, because it is
>> an abstraction which adds complexity and that no
On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 13:28:30 +0200, Daniel Baumann
wrote:
>On 9/3/24 18:24, Lukas Märdian wrote:
>> The nice thing about Netplan is that it [...] functions as a
>> layer on top.
>
>I don't understand what actual problem netplan is trying to solve.
I am also missing that piece of information. At th
Hi,
On 9/3/24 18:24, Lukas Märdian wrote:
> The nice thing about Netplan is that it [...] functions as a
> layer on top.
I don't understand what actual problem netplan is trying to solve.
On servers I want systemd-networkd directly anyway (for lacp, vlan and
bridges), and on end-user desktops I'
* Marco d'Itri [240903 14:04]:
> My position is that I am happy for Debian to have the option of netplan
> but I do not think that it should be installed by default, because it is
> an abstraction which adds complexity and that nobody asked for other
> than its developers.
>
> And this is an o
If the proposed implementation (with netplan) would work as you described
Lukas, I'd have absolutely no objections. Seems like a wonderful idea !
Best,
Alex
On 03.09.24 16:13, Alexandru Mihail wrote:
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
On 9/2/24 21:02, Andrej Shadura wrote:
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024, at 19:41, Daniel Gröber wrote:
I promise you I'm not intentionally, but I do recognize that it may be a
side-effect. Likewise I feel like you're just interested in pushing this
through as quickly as possible.
Consider that for you time
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 Netw
Dear Daniel, and all,
> On 2 Sep 2024, at 22:56, Daniel Gröber wrote:
>
> Hi Andrej,
>
> On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 09:02:43PM +0200, Andrej Shadura wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Sep 2024, at 19:41, Daniel Gröber wrote:
>>> You're continuing to confirm my pre-existing view that netplan infantilizes
>>> it's
My position is that I am happy for Debian to have the option of netplan
but I do not think that it should be installed by default, because it is
an abstraction which adds complexity and that nobody asked for other
than its developers.
And this is an orthogonal issue with deciding if ifupdown is
Hi Andrej,
On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 09:02:43PM +0200, Andrej Shadura wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2024, at 19:41, Daniel Gröber wrote:
> > You're continuing to confirm my pre-existing view that netplan infantilizes
> > it's users as you're applying the same thinking to the entire Debian
> > community her
Daniel,
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024, at 19:41, Daniel Gröber wrote:
> Hi Lukas,
>
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 12:19:20PM +0200, Lukas Märdian wrote:
>> Surveying the wrong set of people will lead to unusable data. Henry Ford
>> summarized this nicely some 100 years ago, when asked about customer input
>> in
Hi Lukas,
On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 12:19:20PM +0200, Lukas Märdian wrote:
> Surveying the wrong set of people will lead to unusable data. Henry Ford
> summarized this nicely some 100 years ago, when asked about customer input
> in the development of the Ford Model T automobile: "If I had asked peop
30 matches
Mail list logo
