3 ms·
Netplan has oversimplified things to cater only to the simplest of topologies. The schema seems unable to capture the richness and modularity of actual networki
by goalieca 3y ago
Netplan has oversimplified things to cater only to the simplest of topologies. The schema seems unable to capture the richness and modularity of actual networking technologies.
- nik736 3y agoExamples?
- mike_d 3y agoLinux allows you to bind a subnet of addresses to an interface so that an application can listen on them. The netplan syntax is poorly thought out and overloads the CIDR notation to specify both the IP and netmask, so it is impossible to specify more than a single address. I use this functionality in production for high availability configurations and effectively have to have a cron job to use 'ip' directly to fix things up.
- smivan 3y agoWhat sort of topologies are you attempting? I was able to set up fiber link aggregation with triple NICs and a custom VLAN and MTU with no issues. It supports bridges and child interfaces just fine. Can you share your details?
- linsomniac 3y agoIf by "only the simplest of topologies" you mean: 4 physical interfaces, bonded with active/backup failover and mii-monitoring, and 20 VLANs, turning off IPv6 on my public interface... Honestly, I really like netplan, been using it for all my systems for ~5 years now.
- Avamander 3y agoI've achieved more reliable and reproducible complex setups with netplan than any hodgepodge of ifupdown scripts has ever done for me. Which topologies does it not work for?