ma 11. maalisk. 2024 klo 7.02 Martin-Éric Racine
(martin-eric.rac...@iki.fi) kirjoitti:
>
> ma 11. maalisk. 2024 klo 1.29 Bernd Zeimetz (be...@bzed.de) kirjoitti:
> > On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 13:54 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> > > I hereby propose bin:dhcpcd-base:
> > >
> > > 1) already supporte
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 07:02:38 +0200, Martin-Éric Racine
wrote:
>Meanwhile a bare minimal system needs a non-GUI solution and swaping
>which DHCP client gets pulled by ifupdown is the simplest, least
>disruptive way of accomplishing this.
Most bare minimal non-GUI systems run fine with systemd-netw
ma 11. maalisk. 2024 klo 1.29 Bernd Zeimetz (be...@bzed.de) kirjoitti:
> On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 13:54 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> > I hereby propose bin:dhcpcd-base:
> >
> > 1) already supported by ifupdown.
> > 2) dual stack (DHCPv4, Bonjour, RA, DHCPv6 with PD) with privilege
> > separation
Hi,
On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 13:54 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> I hereby propose bin:dhcpcd-base:
>
> 1) already supported by ifupdown.
> 2) dual stack (DHCPv4, Bonjour, RA, DHCPv6 with PD) with privilege
> separation.
> 3) writes both IPv4 and IPv6 name servers to /etc/resolv.conf
> 4) suppo
su 10. maalisk. 2024 klo 18.54 Santiago Ruano Rincón
(santiag...@riseup.net) kirjoitti:
>
> Hi there,
>
> El 20/11/23 a las 19:44, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > (non-subscriber - please keep me in CC)
> > On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 4:26 PM Martin-Éric Racine
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jul 22,
Hi there,
El 20/11/23 a las 19:44, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> (non-subscriber - please keep me in CC)
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 4:26 PM Martin-Éric Racine
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 2:55 PM Martin-Éric Racine
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 12:55 PM Martin-Éric Ra
(non-subscriber - please keep me in CC)
On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 4:26 PM Martin-Éric Racine
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 2:55 PM Martin-Éric Racine
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 12:55 PM Martin-Éric Racine
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 3:06 AM Santiago Ruano Rincón
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2023 14:10
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: proposal: dhcpcd-base as standard DHCP client starting with Trixie
Am 18.11.23 um 15:26 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
> What is the current situation?
I don't think we reached a consensus yet.
One particula
Am 18.11.23 um 15:26 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
What is the current situation?
I don't think we reached a consensus yet.
One particular aspect I don't like of the current proposal is that users
upgrading from bookworm will end up with both, isc-dhcp-client and
dhcpcd-base being installed.
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 2:55 PM Martin-Éric Racine
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 12:55 PM Martin-Éric Racine
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 3:06 AM Santiago Ruano Rincón
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > El 22/06/23 a las 09:57, Santiago Ruano Rincón escribió:
> > > > El 20/06/23 a las 08:29,
El 10/07/23 a las 14:52, Helmut Grohne escribió:
> On Sun, Jul 09, 2023 at 05:58:07PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On top of that, a minimal installation chroot doesn't need a
> > fully-featured dhcp client. As Simon said already, busybox is there
> > for any reason for a minimal one. For the re
On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 12:55 PM Martin-Éric Racine
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 3:06 AM Santiago Ruano Rincón
> wrote:
> >
> > El 22/06/23 a las 09:57, Santiago Ruano Rincón escribió:
> > > El 20/06/23 a las 08:29, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 03:06:57PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> However, there are some significant disadvantages to netplan:
> 1) It's an extra layer. You can ignore it when reading the config (at
> least if you aren't too surprised by your config ending up in /run).
> But it is extra complexity,
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 09:33:12AM -0400, Jeremy Bícha wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 8:32 AM Lukas Märdian wrote:
> > (We're also working on a bidirectional Netplan-NetworkManager integration,
> > that allows NM to feed back it's configuration into Netplan YAML format. It
> > is
> > a small pa
On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 02:04:57PM -0400, nick black wrote:
> Sam Hartman left as an exercise for the reader:
> > I consider anything that requires me to write wpa_supplicant config to
> > be a bad idea (unless I'm running an AP) and NetworkManager driving
> > wpa_supplicant is a better idea.
>
>
Sam Hartman left as an exercise for the reader:
> > "nick" == nick black writes:
> I consider anything that requires me to write wpa_supplicant config to
> be a bad idea (unless I'm running an AP) and NetworkManager driving
> wpa_supplicant is a better idea.
i think everyone's agreed on this
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 8:32 AM Lukas Märdian wrote:
> (We're also working on a bidirectional Netplan-NetworkManager integration,
> that allows NM to feed back it's configuration into Netplan YAML format. It is
> a small patch for NetworkManager and is purely optional.)
Does that already exist in
> "Lukas" == Lukas Märdian writes:
Lukas> That would lead to a situation where users would need to
Lukas> differentiate what system they are on when doing their
Lukas> network configuration: Debian Cloud (Netplan)
No, I think if the user is feeding configuration into a cloud image
> "nick" == nick black writes:
I consider anything that requires me to write wpa_supplicant config to
be a bad idea (unless I'm running an AP) and NetworkManager driving
wpa_supplicant is a better idea.
--Sam
Sam Hartman left as an exercise for the reader:
> In the wifi case though, I agree that netplan is a good idea.
> It doesn't look like systemd-networkd supports setting up the
> authentication for a wireless network. So, you'd need to be using
> wpa_supplicant directly and systemd-networkd. I thi
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 01:33:02PM +0200, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:26:52PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > > From the discussions above, it seems that NetworkManager is relevant as
> > > well,
> > > though, and is being pulled in whenever a desktop task is installed
Hi Lukas,
* Lukas Märdian [2023-07-12 12:53]:
Thank you for pointing this out. It's been on my TODO list for a while to split
the netplan.io package, and make the Python-CLI parts optional. They are not
strictly required to configure a system at boot time.
I took your mail as an occation to fi
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:26:52PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > From the discussions above, it seems that NetworkManager is relevant as
> > well,
> > though, and is being pulled in whenever a desktop task is installed (in
> > addition to ifupdown or future systemd-networkd).
>
> What happens
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 at 17:48:40 +0200, Lukas Märdian wrote:
> From the discussions above, it seems that NetworkManager is relevant as well,
> though, and is being pulled in whenever a desktop task is installed (in
> addition to ifupdown or future systemd-networkd).
What happens at the moment is:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 03:06:57PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Lukas" == Lukas Märdian writes:
>
>
> Lukas> Therefore, I'd love to see Netplan to be used in combination
> Lukas> with this! It's a clean, declarative configuration language
> Lukas> not specifically tied to syst
On Jul 11, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 1) It's an extra layer. You can ignore it when reading the config (at
> least if you aren't too surprised by your config ending up in /run).
> But it is extra complexity, especially in a situation like " run dhcp on
> my ethernet" that is relatively simple.
I agre
On 2023-07-12 07:54, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
1) It's an extra layer. [...]
2) It's a layer that you cannot ignore when editing the config. [...]
I'd also add 3) It requires Python and various Python libraries. At
least the CLI tool does.
In some circumstances installing Python and a bunch
On 11/07/23 23:06, Sam Hartman wrote:
However, there are some significant disadvantages to netplan:
1) It's an extra layer. [...]
2) It's a layer that you cannot ignore when editing the config. [...]
I'd also add 3) It requires Python and various Python libraries. At
least the CLI tool does.
> "Lukas" == Lukas Märdian writes:
Lukas> Therefore, I'd love to see Netplan to be used in combination
Lukas> with this! It's a clean, declarative configuration language
Lukas> not specifically tied to systemd-networkd as an
Lukas> implementation. So it could also be used on
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 09:39:52AM -0400, nick black wrote:
> Helmut Grohne left as an exercise for the reader:
> > And yeah, please work on changing that ifupdown by default. I'm faced
> > with having to uninstall it from more and more systems. In case, you
> > do a straw poll, I vote for systemd
Helmut Grohne left as an exercise for the reader:
> And yeah, please work on changing that ifupdown by default. I'm faced
> with having to uninstall it from more and more systems. In case, you
> do a straw poll, I vote for systemd-networkd, which happens to be
> installed by default. Would there b
On Sun, Jul 09, 2023 at 05:58:07PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On top of that, a minimal installation chroot doesn't need a
> fully-featured dhcp client. As Simon said already, busybox is there
> for any reason for a minimal one. For the rest - installer and whatnot
> - the installer and tasklets
On Sat, 8 Jul 2023 at 08:39, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 06:07:58PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > > "Bastian" == Bastian Blank writes:
> > Bastian> Why do we need to have the priority adjusted instead of fix
> > Bastian> d-i to install what it knows the user needs
On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 06:07:58PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Bastian" == Bastian Blank writes:
> Bastian> Why do we need to have the priority adjusted instead of fix
> Bastian> d-i to install what it knows the user needs?
> Because it's not just D-I, it's bootstrapping in general.
> "Bastian" == Bastian Blank writes:
Bastian> On Wed, Jul 05, 2023 at 09:06:24PM -0300, Santiago Ruano Rincón
wrote:
>> For the moment, ifupdown is still installed by the
>> debian-installer as default network interfaces manager. And after
>> sleeping over it, and discussing
On Wed, Jul 05, 2023 at 09:06:24PM -0300, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote:
> For the moment, ifupdown is still installed by the debian-installer as
> default network interfaces manager. And after sleeping over it, and
> discussing with debian fellows, I would like to call for consensus to
> rise Priori
On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 3:06 AM Santiago Ruano Rincón
wrote:
>
> El 22/06/23 a las 09:57, Santiago Ruano Rincón escribió:
> > El 20/06/23 a las 08:29, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
> > > wrote:
> > > > El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric
El 22/06/23 a las 09:57, Santiago Ruano Rincón escribió:
> El 20/06/23 a las 08:29, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
> > wrote:
> > > El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > > > Greetings,
> > > >
> > > > Seeing how the ISC DH
On Thu, 2023-06-22 at 20:51 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 22.06.23 16:03, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
>
> TBH time is too short to manually provision IP addresses on servers.
>
IP addresses are just one of many things that can be instantiated by
/etc/network/interfaces, /etc/network/interfaces.d/,
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 08:51:01PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> TBH time is too short to manually provision IP addresses on servers.
And DHCP is gladly enough entirely optional since SLAAC exists. But
for that you need systemd-networkd/systemd-resolved or a whole bunch of
other software.
Bastian
On 22.06.23 16:03, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Jun 22, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
The point has always been to ship some ifupdown-supported DHCP client
by default. This can be done either by keeping the default client's
priority to important or by making ifupdown Depends on one. I prefer
the later.
Marco d'Itri writes:
> On Jun 22, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
>
>> The point has always been to ship some ifupdown-supported DHCP client
>> by default. This can be done either by keeping the default client's
>> priority to important or by making ifupdown Depends on one. I prefer
>> the later.
> I
On Jun 22, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> The point has always been to ship some ifupdown-supported DHCP client
> by default. This can be done either by keeping the default client's
> priority to important or by making ifupdown Depends on one. I prefer
> the later.
It would be totally unacceptable
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 3:58 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
wrote:
> El 20/06/23 a las 08:29, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
> > wrote:
> > > El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > > > Greetings,
> > > >
> > > > Seeing how the I
El 20/06/23 a las 08:29, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
> wrote:
> > El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
> > > good time to re
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 01:39:02PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 11:19 +0200, Lukas Maerdian wrote:
>
> > Netplan allows to configure both of those tools and is already being
> > used across Ubuntu and in Debian cloud-images for this purpose. All
> > while keeping full flexibilit
On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 11:19 +0200, Lukas Maerdian wrote:
> Netplan allows to configure both of those tools and is already being
> used across Ubuntu and in Debian cloud-images for this purpose. All
> while keeping full flexibility to use the underlying tool's native
> config files, should Netplan'
On 2023-06-19 Sven Joachim wrote:
[...]
> If my above statements about debootstrap are correct, this will result
> in no dhcp-client being installed at all by debootstrap unless the
> override bug also requests bumping dhcpcd-base's priority from optional
> to important.
Not complety true. deboot
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:23:58AM +0100, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> We might be using slightly different terms, but for desktops I still
> tend to use ifupdown (since the network config is easily configured
> thus, and essentially never changes); laptops I have ifupdown &
> network-manager (since th
Simon McVittie left as an exercise for the reader:
> I was using "desktop" in the sense of task-gnome-desktop and friends, more
> than as a class of hardware. Laptops and other portable computers are the
> main thing that really needs easily user-configurable networking.
> I think it makes sense fo
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 at 10:19, Lukas Maerdian wrote:
>
> Am 19.06.23 um 20:01 schrieb Simon McVittie:
> > On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 14:13:11 +0200, Ansgar wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 13:35 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> >>> Why does isc-dhcp-client have priority:important to begin with?
> >>> I d
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 at 11:42, Simon McVittie wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 at 05:03:19 -0400, nick black wrote:
> > Simon McVittie left as an exercise for the reader:
> > > At the moment I believe the status quo for d-i is that networking is
> > > managed by NetworkManager if a desktop task happe
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 at 05:03:19 -0400, nick black wrote:
> Simon McVittie left as an exercise for the reader:
> > At the moment I believe the status quo for d-i is that networking is
> > managed by NetworkManager if a desktop task happens to have pulled it in,
> > or ifupdown otherwise? And that se
On Tue, 2023-06-20 at 05:03 -0400, nick black wrote:
> Simon McVittie left as an exercise for the reader:
> > At the moment I believe the status quo for d-i is that networking is
> > managed by NetworkManager if a desktop task happens to have pulled it in,
> > or ifupdown otherwise? And that seems
Ansgar writes:
> I think this should be NetworkManager for desktop environments and I
> personally like systemd-networkd for other environments. In both cases
> these replace both ifupdown and isc-dhcp-client.
We might be using slightly different terms, but for desktops I still
tend to use ifupd
nick black writes:
> what
> does NetworkManager offer that makes it superior to
> systemd-networkd on the desktop
I don't know what systemd-networkd has to offer in this regard, but for
laptop usage I'm personally fond of the ModemManager integration along
with multihoming policies (eth0 preferr
Am 19.06.23 um 20:01 schrieb Simon McVittie:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 14:13:11 +0200, Ansgar wrote:
On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 13:35 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
Why does isc-dhcp-client have priority:important to begin with?
I don't think users care so much about a dhcp client but rather a
network con
Simon McVittie left as an exercise for the reader:
> At the moment I believe the status quo for d-i is that networking is
> managed by NetworkManager if a desktop task happens to have pulled it in,
> or ifupdown otherwise? And that seems reasonable (although I personally
> prefer to set up systemd-
Am 19.06.23 um 21:05 schrieb Luca Boccassi:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 18:21, Philipp Kern wrote:
On 2023-06-19 14:37, Luca Boccassi wrote:
The advantage of doing that is that it's what Ubuntu does IIRC, so
there will be extra pooling&sharing of resources to maintain those
setups, and the road sh
Martin-Éric Racine writes:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
> wrote:
>> El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
>> > Greetings,
>> >
>> > Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
>> > good time to re-visit Debian's choice of stan
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
wrote:
> El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
> > good time to re-visit Debian's choice of standard DHCP client shipping
> > with pri
On 2023-06-19 21:37 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 21:42:08 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
>> I've never had to do this before, so I wonder if moving packages to
>> severity: standard or higher (in this case, important) requires any
>> decision from the CTTE or a similar a
Am 19.06.23 um 22:37 schrieb Simon McVittie:
If you agree with the way forward that I'm suggesting, then I think the
way to do it would be:
1. open an override bug asking for isc-dhcp-client to be lowered from
important to optional
2. wait for the ftp team to do that
3. ask the ifupdown main
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 21:42:08 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> I've never had to do this before, so I wonder if moving packages to
> severity: standard or higher (in this case, important) requires any
> decision from the CTTE or a similar authority, before we proceed?
Regarding *whether* to ma
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 18:21, Philipp Kern wrote:
>
> On 2023-06-19 14:37, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > The advantage of doing that is that it's what Ubuntu does IIRC, so
> > there will be extra pooling&sharing of resources to maintain those
> > setups, and the road should already be paved for it.
>
>
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 20:00, Martin-Éric Racine
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
> wrote:
> > El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > > Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
> > > good time to re-visit Debian's ch
On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 9:11 PM Santiago Ruano Rincón
wrote:
> El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
> > good time to re-visit Debian's choice of standard DHCP client shipping
> > with priority:important.
>
Hi,
El 19/06/23 a las 13:54, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> Greetings,
>
> Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
> good time to re-visit Debian's choice of standard DHCP client shipping
> with priority:important.
>
> I hereby propose bin:dhcpcd-base:
>
> 1) alre
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 14:13:11 +0200, Ansgar wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 13:35 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Why does isc-dhcp-client have priority:important to begin with?
> > I don't think users care so much about a dhcp client but rather a
> > network configuration system
>
> The priorit
On 2023-06-19 14:37, Luca Boccassi wrote:
The advantage of doing that is that it's what Ubuntu does IIRC, so
there will be extra pooling&sharing of resources to maintain those
setups, and the road should already be paved for it.
I am not sure if I have seen this play out in practice[1].
Ubuntu
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 13:13, Ansgar wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 13:35 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Why does isc-dhcp-client have priority:important to begin with?
> > I don't think users care so much about a dhcp client but rather a
> > network configuration system and each network config
On Mon, 2023-06-19 at 13:35 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Why does isc-dhcp-client have priority:important to begin with?
> I don't think users care so much about a dhcp client but rather a
> network configuration system and each network configuration system
> has its own preferred dhcp implementa
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 at 12:36, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Am 19.06.23 um 12:54 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
> > good time to re-visit Debian's choice of standard DHCP client shipping
> > with priority:importa
Am 19.06.23 um 12:54 schrieb Martin-Éric Racine:
Greetings,
Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
good time to re-visit Debian's choice of standard DHCP client shipping
with priority:important.
I hereby propose bin:dhcpcd-base:
1) already supported by ifupdown.
Greetings,
Seeing how the ISC DHCP suite has reached EOL upstream, now might be a
good time to re-visit Debian's choice of standard DHCP client shipping
with priority:important.
I hereby propose bin:dhcpcd-base:
1) already supported by ifupdown.
2) dual stack (DHCPv4, Bonjour, RA, DHCPv6 with PD
75 matches
Mail list logo
