Hi, > Hi Christian! Glad to hear from you again! > of course :) I am still alive :)
> This is fixed in Ubuntu 11.10 and later. > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dhcp3/+bug/580319 > > We do not boot to runlevel 2 unless either all "auto" interfaces from > /etc/network/interfaces are up, or 120 seconds have passed since lo > was brought up. This gives ample time for any DHCP or heavy static > configurations/bridge/bonded/etc configurations to finish, but will > continue the boot in case you have listed an interface there that is > broken or will never come up. > That is really great to hear! I really was afraid, how this would continue in future releases. For me, this sounds like a great idea with the runlevel/120s thing. What I miss in interfaces is a better ipv6 support. I find it somewhat weird to configure multiple addresses like this: # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 88.198.80.228 netmask 255.255.255.255 gateway 88.198.61.177 pointopoint 88.198.61.177 post-up /bin/ip neigh replace to 88.198.61.177 lladdr 2c:6b:f5:8a:72:84 nud permanent dev ${IFACE} pre-down /bin/ip neigh del to 88.198.61.177 lladdr 2c:6b:f5:8a:72:84 nud permanent dev ${IFACE} iface eth0 inet6 static address 2a01:4f8:131:1081:88:198:80:228 netmask 64 gateway 2a01:4f8:131:1080::1 pre-up /bin/ip -6 route add 2a01:4f8:131:1080::1 dev ${IFACE} post-up /bin/ip -6 route add 2000::/3 via 2a01:4f8:131:1080::1 dev ${IFACE} auto eth0:0 iface eth0:0 inet static # mail.roessner-net.de address 88.198.80.230 netmask 255.255.255.248 broadcast 88.198.80.231 iface eth0:0 inet6 static # mail.roessner-net.de address 2a01:4f8:131:1081:88:198:80:230 netmask 64 There are several things that are not optimal. IPv6 are not aliases. A second way of configuring them was to add post-up stuff. I know, this might look like off-topic, but network configuration is part of Upstart and if the basic configuration makes trouble, you will have problems n the whole boot process. So I would suggest to optimize network configuration in general. I have a dozen of configurations, even with bonding/vlan mixtures, where boot process is really critical. Especially in the latter case, where you use bonding and stuff in HA setups. If the boot process is not 100% stable, the whole HA is unstable. And this on a LTS release. > Anyway, give 11.10 a try, its possible we will backport something to > lucid, but no guarantees, as its a rather large change in the way we > treat /etc/network/interfaces, and it has not been popular with everyone, > as there are some people abusing /etc/network/interfaces and this causes > their system to take 2 minutes extra too boot. I can not easily give 11.10 a try, because most systems are really production systems (and some of the customers do not have testing environments). I only could give it a try on my own server, but then I would have to upgrade 11 servers at once, because they have a lot of dependencies with services to each other (postgres backport, LDAP nackport, ...). If there was a chance to have a backport package for 11.10, I could test it on individual servers and give feedback to you. Even, if there was a testing PPA, I would test it for you, bt PLEASE do not force me for upgrades right now. That really would be pain ;) Best wishes and thanks that you answered me. I was happy to hear especially from you, Clint, again :) Best wishes Christian --- Roessner-Network-Solutions Bachelor of Science Informatik Nahrungsberg 81, 35390 Gießen F: +49 641 5879091, M: +49 176 93118939 USt-IdNr.: DE225643613 http://www.roessner-network-solutions.com
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- upstart-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/upstart-devel
