| 12 Apr 2023 |
 @arianvp:matrix.org | Hmm | 19:03:06 |
| 15 Apr 2023 |
 @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/226237 | 07:41:18 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | It'd be great to gets docs unhidden for 23.05 | 07:41:33 |
|  Yinfeng changed their profile picture. | 15:05:02 |
| Yinfeng changed their profile picture. | 15:08:57 |
| Yinfeng removed their profile picture. | 15:12:08 |
| Yinfeng set a profile picture. | 15:12:36 |
| 16 Apr 2023 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | flokli: I think I've addressed all the comments on the networkd PR. Can we hit the merge button sometime soon? | 00:47:23 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | flokli: If flushBeforeStage2 is a blocker, let's split that out into a separate PR. I'm just confused why its a question now when it's been a part of scripted initrd for a long time. | 16:34:03 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | * flokli: If flushBeforeStage2 is a blocker, let's split that out into a separate PR. I'm just confused why it's a question now when it's been a part of scripted initrd for a long time. | 16:34:22 |
 @hexa:lossy.network | not sure what is unclear about setting the network down before leaving stage1 | 16:39:03 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | I consider that a mandatory step to not break network settings that stage2 wants to apply | 16:39:36 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | hexa: the systemd-networkd man page suggests not bringing things down before stage 2 so that everything stays configured all the way through. I think for the typical case, the configuration in stage 2 and stage 1 will be the same, so this seems fine to me? | 16:40:46 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | i.e. DHCP on interfaces X, Y, Z, and that's about it | 16:41:01 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | what if I try to rename a link in my stage2? | 16:41:11 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | I would say that's atypical | 16:41:19 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | and you can set flushBeforeStage2 = true for that :) | 16:41:28 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | basically what you're saying is that people should configure their whole networking in stage1 as opposed to stage2? | 16:42:01 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | No? | 16:42:15 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | For stage 1, most people probably just want DHCP on one or all of the physical interfaces, as configured typically with networking.useDHCP or networking.interfaces.... Then stage 2 can take over network configuration and add any fancier things on top of that, but presumably most people will still want those same interfaces configured with DHCP | 16:44:28 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | * For stage 1, most people probably just want DHCP on one or all of the physical interfaces, as configured typically with networking.useDHCP or networking.interfaces... (often generated by nixos-generate-config). Then stage 2 can take over network configuration and add any fancier things on top of that, but presumably most people will still want those same interfaces configured with DHCP | 16:44:48 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | so your intent is to save one DHCP roundtrip in that scenario | 16:45:50 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | My intent was mainly to follow the suggestion in the systemd-networkd man page, and it made enough sense to me to make it default but still implement the flush behavior for those who want it | 16:46:41 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | but also | 16:46:42 |
| @elvishjerricco:matrix.org | there's things like root on NFS that would rely on having flushing disabled | 16:46:52 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | personally I configure a dedicated IPv6 address in stage1, and something else in stage2, so that I don't get conflicting hostkeys on SSH 🙂 | 16:47:03 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | no strong opinion, as you said I can enable flushing | 16:47:44 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | * no strong opinion, as you said I can enable flushing and I will | 16:47:50 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | since it is configurable I don't see it as a blocker fwiw | 16:48:34 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | the default also doesn't bother me too much | 16:48:44 |
