On 12/14/2015 03:55 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 12:31:45PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: >> The situation is not at all the same; there is no clear expectation >> that networkd will replace NetworkManager, indeed AFAIK it's been >> explicitly stated that it won't, because it's not desirable for it to >> cover all the complex configurations NM supports. > > One development (mostly) since we started talking about this is that NM > is now much more modular, and has a "configure and go away" mode (the > lack of which was the main reason for not using it in the cloud image > in the first place). It also can use the same lightweight DHCP library > that systemd does, which in either case is an advantage over ye olde > memory-hungry reference implementation as used by the initscripts > networking. > > I'm not saying it's the automatic winner over systemd-networkd, but all > that should be taken into consideration. Another thing to consider is that we currently use the same Atomic ostree for cloud and bare metal. Does that fact change our opinion on using networkd vs NM? Does networkd cover all the use cases that are needed for Atomic on bare metal? Should we continue to deliver it like that in the future? All things to ponder, - Dusty _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
