Olaf Kirch wrote:
Do we really need yet another network management
No, not really. We already have the good old ifup/ifdown scripts, who
are doing their job nicely, if you don't strain them too much or try
to make them learn new tricks (like integrating with systemd). Of all
the tunables and knobs the kernel supports for each network interface,
we're covering maybe 10%, but what was good enough for grandpa should
be good enough for me as well, right?
It's probably worth pointing out that those 10% are what matters to the
90% of our users.
Overall I think it's a good idea to clean up the mess and enhance the
functionality, but I would worry about the migration. The enhanced
functionality falls in relatively complex areas where admins (who use
the 90% not covered by the current network management framework) will
typically have their own set of scripts etc.
Quick, can you tell me how to...
- ... disable IPv6 on a specific interface?
- ... set up an interface for DHCPv4 and DHCPv6?
- ... change the link speed on an Ethernet interface?
- ... reconfigure a bonding device without bringing it down?
- ... set up a bridge using two bonded NICs as one of its ports?
- ... the same as above, with VLAN tagging?
- ... change the firewall rules on your UMTS modem?
- ... set up 802.1x authentication for your Ethernet NIC?
- ... set up persistent names for your System z devices?
If you could answer all of them at the snap of a finger, please send
me your CV.
Hehe, I think I managed 2 of the above, but that is all I have ever had
a need for.
Three, a modern network management framework should
support a way to
identify network devices by means other than their name. That name is
really secondary; and tools should not rely on it.
The interface name is pretty essential to tools such as SNMP.
Oh my god, it uses XML!!!
The desire to use a layered approach goes hand in hand with the need
to have a less unstructured configuration file format. There are a
number of different formats, including json and XML.
I ended up picking XML as the primary configuration file format.
Sounds good to me.
Naming of network devices in the kernel is a pain. Of course, it's not
intentionally made painful, but from a user's perspective, it is - if
you've ever run a server with several Ethernet interfaces in it, you
know what I'm talking about.
All of our servers have multiple interfaces, typically 2 or 4 - tbh, I'm
not sure what the problem is. Maybe I'm just used to it?
Per Jessen, Zürich (26.7°C)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org