On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:42:43PM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > On 13/04/2011 10:53, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > >On 04/04/2011 12:56 PM, Jon Dowland wrote: > >>On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > >>>It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible > >>>permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be > >>>able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't > >>>support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as > >>>multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. > >> > >>Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management > >>solution to handle all of these? > > > >Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, > > yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. > > > > I sincerely hope that you're joking… At least, the rest of the project > doesn't share this view. It's like saying that "Desktop users are second > class citizens", which is plain wrong! He didn't say anything you're implying. Some misunderstanding, I guess. Debian, as a universal OS, needs to support Servers and Desktops and ... properly. Any solution thus needs to handle all those cases properly. Then add the usual Ubuntu bashing: for all who don't need that kind of universality, there's Ubuntu (which, btw, also delivers server solutions). No-one is second class. Or, if I understand bzed right, Ubuntu is. :) Hauke -- .''`. Jan Hauke Rahm <jhr@debian.org> www.jhr-online.de : :' : Debian Developer www.debian.org `. `'` Member of the Linux Foundation www.linux.com `- Fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe www.fsfe.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature