6 ms·

Defaults matter, but he's right to say each distro should be the ones setting the default. Most people aren't compiling systemd themselves, they're using the on

Defaults matter, but he's right to say each distro should be the ones setting the default. Most people aren't compiling systemd themselves, they're using the one compiled by their distro maintainer(s). I don't think this is anything to worry about and he's right to shut out pointless conversation from people who misunderstand the actual situation. Accusations of being paid by Google (or any other entity) is ludicrous and can easily be interpreted as insulting too.

vonmoltke 6y ago
> Defaults matter, but he's right to say each distro should be the ones setting the default. Most people aren't compiling systemd themselves, they're using the one compiled by their distro maintainer(s). In that case, the final comment in the discussion is correct: systemd itself should not have a default, and should require the distro maintainer to explicitly set these values to whatever default they want to use.
- packetlost 6y ago
  I'm inclined to agree, though without being familiar with systemd's codebase and infrastructure, there may be technical reasons why that hasn't been done
- djsumdog 6y ago
  I agree. There shouldn't be any hardcoded DNS/NTP fallbacks. I don't use systemd on any of my personal systems or my dedicated server (Gentoo/Void), so I don't have to worry about this. But on my Ubuntu VMs, I guess there's a fallback DNS/NTP in my startup process I never knew about. I agree. The default should be set (and required; without defaults) by the distro maintainers downstream. Just leave them out here.
Kaze404 6y ago
There were no accusations. Someone asked a fair question. The maintainer clearly overreacted.
- packetlost 6y ago
  No, that question was asked in bad faith. By asking the question, you implying that there's a conflict of interest or some monetary motivation for the decision. If they truly wanted to ask a neutral question, something like "Given the for-profit nature and potential privacy concerns, why is Google's DNS the default instead of some other non-profit entity?"
  - wtallis 6y ago
    > No, that question was asked in bad faith. By asking the question, you implying that there's a conflict of interest or some monetary motivation for the decision. It's not bad faith to ask that question, when raising the issue previously got a complete non-answer that failed to acknowledge that there was a reason behind wanting different defaults. "Why didn't you answer the question the first time?" is fair game; Poettering provoked that response.
  - KaiserPro 6y ago
    The defaults have kicked me in the genitals a number of times Stuff magically failing, with no obvious reason why. The I realise that someone has cocked up the DNS config, its been silently rejected and is now defaulting back to the default DNS config. I want it to fail, and fail loudly, not limp on and cause odd errors.
  - falcolas 6y ago
    Been poorly worded doesn't make the question bad. Your example makes the exact same assumptions. And they're fair assumptions - Google is well known for giving funding to open source projects to get their products set as defaults.
    - packetlost 6y ago
      > Your example makes the exact same assumptions My example does not make the assertion that Google donated/bribed the systemd project, so no, it does not make the same assumptions. It intentionally leaves any implied motivations open ended. > And they're fair assumptions - Google is well known for giving funding to open source projects to get their products set as defaults. The only case I'm aware of is Firefox, which had a contract with Mozilla to have the Google search engine be the default. I'm curious to hear about more though. The privacy concerns with Google DNS seem to be partially unfounded too [1]. Granted, that is coming from Google themselves, but privacy policies are legally binding. For the record, I don't think there should be a default at all, but I have no problems with how Poettering handled this. [1]: https://developers.google.com/speed/public-dns/faq#privacy https://developers.google.com/speed/public-dns/faq#privacy
mrighele 6y ago
If the distro is supposed set a default, don't provide one.

vonmoltke 6y ago

> Defaults matter, but he's right to say each distro should be the ones setting the default. Most people aren't compiling systemd themselves, they're using the one compiled by their distro maintainer(s). In that case, the final comment in the discussion is correct: systemd itself should not have a default, and should require the distro maintainer to explicitly set these values to whatever default they want to use.

packetlost 6y ago
I'm inclined to agree, though without being familiar with systemd's codebase and infrastructure, there may be technical reasons why that hasn't been done
djsumdog 6y ago
I agree. There shouldn't be any hardcoded DNS/NTP fallbacks. I don't use systemd on any of my personal systems or my dedicated server (Gentoo/Void), so I don't have to worry about this. But on my Ubuntu VMs, I guess there's a fallback DNS/NTP in my startup process I never knew about. I agree. The default should be set (and required; without defaults) by the distro maintainers downstream. Just leave them out here.

Kaze404 6y ago

There were no accusations. Someone asked a fair question. The maintainer clearly overreacted.

packetlost 6y ago
No, that question was asked in bad faith. By asking the question, you implying that there's a conflict of interest or some monetary motivation for the decision. If they truly wanted to ask a neutral question, something like "Given the for-profit nature and potential privacy concerns, why is Google's DNS the default instead of some other non-profit entity?"
- wtallis 6y ago
  > No, that question was asked in bad faith. By asking the question, you implying that there's a conflict of interest or some monetary motivation for the decision. It's not bad faith to ask that question, when raising the issue previously got a complete non-answer that failed to acknowledge that there was a reason behind wanting different defaults. "Why didn't you answer the question the first time?" is fair game; Poettering provoked that response.
- KaiserPro 6y ago
  The defaults have kicked me in the genitals a number of times Stuff magically failing, with no obvious reason why. The I realise that someone has cocked up the DNS config, its been silently rejected and is now defaulting back to the default DNS config. I want it to fail, and fail loudly, not limp on and cause odd errors.
- falcolas 6y ago
  Been poorly worded doesn't make the question bad. Your example makes the exact same assumptions. And they're fair assumptions - Google is well known for giving funding to open source projects to get their products set as defaults.
  - packetlost 6y ago
    > Your example makes the exact same assumptions My example does not make the assertion that Google donated/bribed the systemd project, so no, it does not make the same assumptions. It intentionally leaves any implied motivations open ended. > And they're fair assumptions - Google is well known for giving funding to open source projects to get their products set as defaults. The only case I'm aware of is Firefox, which had a contract with Mozilla to have the Google search engine be the default. I'm curious to hear about more though. The privacy concerns with Google DNS seem to be partially unfounded too [1]. Granted, that is coming from Google themselves, but privacy policies are legally binding. For the record, I don't think there should be a default at all, but I have no problems with how Poettering handled this. [1]: https://developers.google.com/speed/public-dns/faq#privacy https://developers.google.com/speed/public-dns/faq#privacy

mrighele 6y ago

If the distro is supposed set a default, don't provide one.