Re: Community survey on network stack for Trixie
On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 11:27:45 +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler
<zeha@debian.org> wrote:
>* Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> [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 orthogonal issue with deciding if ifupdown is appropriate
>> for a modern system (I have been using it for close to 30 years and at
>> this point I think that it has served its purpose and there are better
>> defaults...).
>
>I want to echo all of this. All my customers sites are currently
>migrating away from ifupdown to networkd, and they don't need or
>want an intermediate layer.
>
>For the desktop(-like) systems, NetworkManager works nicely, again
>without a need for an intermediate layer.
This, and this.
>Again, having the option is nice. But I don't see netplan as a
>useful default.
And, choosing Netplan as a default doesn't solve the issue, since we'd
still have to decide what we'd use below it by default, leaving us
with the same hard decision: NetworkManager which bears its mock name
NetworkDamager for a reason, systemd-networkd which is kind of
unsuitable for desktop(-like) systems, comes from the much-hated
systemd world (thus igniting a systemd debate everywhere it is
mentioned) and contains way to much not-invented-here code regarding
IPv6, or ifupdown, which is outdated if I'm being friendly, and a
Debianism.
Greetings
Marc
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
Reply to: