guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Advanced network configuration


From: Julien Lepiller
Subject: Re: Advanced network configuration
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2022 16:07:15 +0200
User-agent: K-9 Mail for Android

I guess using debbugs would give other people a chance to have a look at your patches and comment, but I'm the only one who can push anyway. If you decide to use debbugs, make sure to CC me too.

Le 6 octobre 2022 15:11:30 GMT+02:00, Alexey Abramov <levenson@mmer.org> a écrit :
Hi Ludo, Julien

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

Hi Alexey,

(Cc: Julien, author of Guile-Netlink.)


[...]


I’m sure your improvements to Guile-Netlink would be welcome.

Regarding ‘static-networking’ in Guix, the goal was to allow it to be as
expressive as the underlying netlink interface, but clearly we focused
on the most common use cases.

If you can think of how you’d like to represent these setups in
‘static-networking’ (perhaps a ‘bonds’ field similar to the netplan YAML
snippet you showed?), we (or you :-)) can try and implement it.

Yeah, that was my intention =). @Julien Could you tell me how can I
collaborate? Shall I send patches to you directly or maybe debbugs, or
guix-patches?

2. Having a router with Guix at home. I have to run multiple services
that provision 'networking' which is not allowed right now. The DHCP
client service is greedy right now and binds to all available
interfaces. I sent a [1] patch to solve this. However, I cannot define
dhcp-client and static configuration at the same time anyway.

OK, we could allow users to change the Shepherd service name used by the
DHCP client then.

That would indeed help for now. I can prepare yet another patch for
that.

[...]

I’m not sure. IIUC, a “networking target” here could translate to a
Shepherd service that depends on all the relevant DHCP and static
networking services. The question the becomes how to express that
grouping conveniently.

Yes, I also would like to point out that their must be a way to
establish a firewall, for example, *before* any network interface is up
(After=network-pre.target in systemd [1]). And the same thing during the
shutdown procedure (Before=network-pre.target in systemd). Applications
have to be able to gracefully shutdown their network connections. Is it
the case right now, I don't know?

I am checking (shepherd services) where `shutdown-services' defined, and
seems like it just walks across %services hash table. Am I missing
something?

Footnotes:
[1] https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.special.html#network-pre.target

--
Alexey

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]