so is this 'working as designed' so I'm not allowed to make a tunnel on a DHCP device using systemd networkd configuration files? I can fall back to configuring it as a .service though I had as many issues with that as the normal configuration.
1) this again goes back to why I want to run a script on DHCP address assignment, preferably with the new address given as a parameter to the script... or 2) if there was a way to specify ${eth0.address} as the tunnel (netdev? network?) configuration parameter On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:44 PM, J Decker <d3c...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes; I thnk instead it's a DHCP issue; since the device has no address > to start, adding the tunnel endpoing to that socket without an address > seems to be failing. It has to wait until the DHCP signal, and then > it really needs the DHCP address to update the tunnel endpoint > configuration. > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Am Mon, 29 Feb 2016 19:12:11 -0800 >> schrieb J Decker <d3c...@gmail.com>: >> >>> I would have thought that naming 00-eth0.network; 01-eth1.network or >>> something would start devices in that order? >> >> No... It does say nothing about order in your sense. It's just ordering >> which configuration overwrites another when options are specified in >> multiple files. >> >> So it's not start order, it just order of precedence for configuration >> options. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Kai >> >> Replies to list-only preferred. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> systemd-devel mailing list >> systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel