Hi,
sorry for the delay.
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Could you give the packages at
> https://people.debian.org/~biebl/systemd/buster/ a try?
It seems to work for me:
$ sudo sysctl net.ipv6.conf.default.disable_ipv6=1
net.ipv6.conf.default.disable_ipv6 = 1
$ cat
Am 27.06.19 um 09:09 schrieb Raphael Hertzog:
> The net result of this problem is a server that is not reachable after a
> reboot so it can certainly be argued that it's worth documenting. It could
> be a debconf prompt that happens only when systemd-networkd is active
> and when ipv6 is disabled,
Hi,
On Wed, 26 Jun 2019, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I agree. While setting up an IPv6 address and at the same time disabling
> IPv6 on the kernel side could be seen as a misconfiguration, it might
> just as well be plain oversight on the admin's side.
> networkd behaving more sensibly in that case is
Am 26.06.19 um 14:17 schrieb Felipe Sateler:
> Honestly, I don't think networkd should keep quiet about ipv6 being
> disabled when you explicitly set up an ipv6 address.
I agree. While setting up an IPv6 address and at the same time disabling
IPv6 on the kernel side could be seen as a
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019, 17:12 Michael Biebl wrote:
> Control: severity -1 important
>
> Hi Raphael
>
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 22:33:21 +0200 Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Hi Raphael,
> >
> > On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 15:51:14 +0200 Raphael Hertzog
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wed, 05 Jun 2019, Michael
Control: severity -1 important
Hi Raphael
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 22:33:21 +0200 Michael Biebl wrote:
> Hi Raphael,
>
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 15:51:14 +0200 Raphael Hertzog
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, 05 Jun 2019, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > > systemd-networkd.service in v241 is locked down more
Hi Raphael,
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 15:51:14 +0200 Raphael Hertzog
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 05 Jun 2019, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > systemd-networkd.service in v241 is locked down more tightly then v232.
> > It might be worth a try to comment out the hardening features one by one
> > to see if one of
Hi,
On Wed, 05 Jun 2019, Michael Biebl wrote:
> systemd-networkd.service in v241 is locked down more tightly then v232.
> It might be worth a try to comment out the hardening features one by one
> to see if one of them causes your problem.
Thanks for the idea! I tried that but it did not help. I
Am 05.06.19 um 14:03 schrieb Raphael Hertzog:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 05 Jun 2019, Michael Biebl wrote:
>> What's the status of this bug?
>
> No progress.
>
>> Can you reproduce it with v242 from experimental?
>
> Yes.
>
>> I guess upstream is waiting for your feedback:
>>
Hi,
On Wed, 05 Jun 2019, Michael Biebl wrote:
> What's the status of this bug?
No progress.
> Can you reproduce it with v242 from experimental?
Yes.
> I guess upstream is waiting for your feedback:
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/12656#issuecomment-496293294
I will provide my
On Fri, 24 May 2019 09:30:50 +0200 =?utf-8?q?Rapha=C3=ABl_Hertzog?=
wrote:
> Package: systemd
> Version: 241-3
> Severity: serious
> File: systemd-networkd
> User: de...@kali.org
> Usertags: origin-kali
>
> I upgraded an (OVH) dedicated server to Debian buster with systemd 241-3 and
> while it
Package: systemd
Version: 241-3
Severity: serious
File: systemd-networkd
User: de...@kali.org
Usertags: origin-kali
I upgraded an (OVH) dedicated server to Debian buster with systemd 241-3 and
while it rebooted correctly, the network did not came back. Looking into
the logs I saw the following
12 matches
Mail list logo
