>> >>But it is not used as the default networking configuration stack by any >> >>existing Fedora deliverable of which I'm aware. >> >> >> >Correct in that point. >> > >> >>> We are >> >>>talking about enabling it as default networking stack. >> >> This comes at a cost. It sounds more like 'gut feeling' to have networkd as >> default because we (fedora) have to be 'first' ? >> Just sighting the foundation statement, >> <snip> >> *First* represents our commitment to innovation. We are not content to let >> others do all the heavy lifting on our behalf; we provide the latest in >> stable and robust, useful, and powerful free software in our Fedora >> distribution. >> </snip> >> >> I haven't worked on networkd myself, so you can beat me on that.. but from >> other responses to this thread I see that networkd still has to cover some >> ground before we label it as latest in stable and robust. I don't want to >> sound conservative, but remember, once we make it default it won't look good >> on us to retract if there are lot of issues. > If you read the other replies in the thread from the people who are > already using networkd, you will find it is actually the opposite. It is > very much stable, and robust, and latest in network stack (CoreOS is > using it as default from 2014). I don't think what CoreOS / Ubuntu or any other distro uses as default is a valid argument here. I'm sure networkd is stable, but then for most of the cloud use cases of a single wired eth interface using a virtio driver running dhcp you could write a small bash script and have it be perfectly stable too. Peter _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
