From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stefan Schantl <stefan.schantl@ipfire.org>
To: development@lists.ipfire.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Network / Systemd integration
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 16:48:38 +0200
Message-ID: <4FABD546.4020707@ipfire.org>
In-Reply-To: <1336509590.15371.192.camel@rice-oxley.tremer.info>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2580747193003622178=="
List-Id: <development.lists.ipfire.org>

--===============2580747193003622178==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Michael,

thanks for the quick reply and the provided feedback.

I've spent a lot of time to think about your suggestion and agree with you.

It is a much better way to put all this network stuff into the network 
script's.
An other point is, that we don't need an extra script to hack / do 
something which isn't supported by systemd itself.

Stefan

> Hey Stefan,
>
> I have some amendments on this proposal because I am mainly
> uncomfortable with putting systemd on charge to bring up the network
> zones. The network code should be able to determine which zones are
> brought up and when.
>
> Therefore, creating symlinks on our own in the systemd filesystem is not
> a good idea.
>
> We should be able to control zones independently and systemd should
> control the status of it. We can achieve this by using the
> network(a).service which could be started by the "network start" command.
>
> The boot process could look like this:
>
> network.service - Manageable by the user.
>      (pre-exec) network init
>      (exec    ) network start
>                  `-->  Starts all zones: network(a)lan0.service, ...
>
> network(a).service - Controls a single zone
>      (exec    ) network zone lan0 up
>
> network.target
>      Doesn't really do anything but needed to indicate that
>      the network is up. However, I am not sure yet what could
>      be a criteria, because I don't want to wait until all zones
>      are properly set up (internet connections take some time
>      and should not block the boot process).
>
>      Maybe somebody else has got a good idea for this.
>
> ----
>
> I figure this setup will help us a lot. systemd is controlling the zones
> and sets them up and down. So a lot of this will be done in parallel and
> doesn't block anything else.
>
> The network code could hold down some zones or all of them when it is
> told to do so by the kernel command line for example. I can think of
> some more cases which are all easily to implement in this scenario.
>
> Michael
>
> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 20:11 +0200, Stefan Schantl wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On the Developer Summit we have spoken about network and systemd - how
>> our implemention works and how we can improve it.
>>
>> I've written a roadmap which contains all changes and new features.
>>
>> http://wiki.ipfire.org/devel/network/systemd
>>
>> Please read through and perform any feedback or any new idea's you have.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Stefan
>> _______________________________________________
>> Development mailing list
>> Development(a)lists.ipfire.org
>> http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/listinfo/development
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development(a)lists.ipfire.org
> http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>


--===============2580747193003622178==--