-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/28/2014 06:48 PM, Oron Peled wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 28 January 2014 08:23:46 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> Forwarding this to ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org as well.
>> Responses inline.
>
> As I'm not on the server list (yet), I replied to both l
On Wed, 2014-01-29 at 01:48 +0200, Oron Peled wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 January 2014 08:23:46 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Forwarding this to ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org as well. Responses
> > inline.
>
> As I'm not on the server list (yet), I replied to both lists.
> If "devel" should be off this
On Tuesday 28 January 2014 08:23:46 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Forwarding this to ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org as well. Responses
> inline.
As I'm not on the server list (yet), I replied to both lists.
If "devel" should be off this thread, just remove it in your next reply
and I'll understand t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Forwarding this to ser...@lists.fedoraproject.org as well. Responses
inline.
On 01/27/2014 07:35 PM, Oron Peled wrote:
>
> On Monday 27 January 2014 14:01:32 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> ... or some mechanism to interactively configure and deploy a
>
Hi,
THAT would be worhty of being called Fedora.Next .
cu romal
Am 28.01.14 01:35, schrieb Oron Peled:
On Monday 27 January 2014 14:01:32 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
...
or some mechanism to interactively configure and deploy a DHCP server.
IMO, that's exactly the crux of the matter. Most no
On Monday 27 January 2014 14:01:32 Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> ...
> or some mechanism to interactively configure and deploy a DHCP server.
IMO, that's exactly the crux of the matter. Most non-trivial services
requires some administrative decisions to configure them properly.
Since rpm does not a
On 27.01.2014 22:05, Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
> Hi,
>
> if the server sits in a RFC1918 network (192.168.1.0/16), has a static
> IP and a configured gateway and DNS, it might be reasonable to assume,
> the dhcpd should operate in this range and set the options for DNS and
> gateway accordingly.
>
On Jan 27, 2014, at 2:16 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> The reason why these daemons are not ready to run is that when they used to
> be ready to run, they caused problems with whatever environment was already
> there. We used to ship tools which could do what was thought to be a
> reasona
On 27.01.2014 22:01, Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
> Hi,
>
> dhcpd is just an (maybe bad) example.
It is good example. See dhcp configuration in your home router - it
requires some attention. Then try some Cisco or HP router and its dhcp
configuration. This smart devices are not so smart to work for
On 27 January 2014 14:01, Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
> Hi,
>
> dhcpd is just an (maybe bad) example.
>
> But even dhcpd needs a lot of work. I need to configure ranges, options
> (which could like gateqway and dns partly automagically gathered from the
> exsting network configuration), ... binding
Hi,
He's not suggesting turning services on by default just by installing
pacakges (I don't think). I think his request here is similar to our
Fedora Server Roles idea where there are special "packages" (possibly
meta-packages) that are separate from the simple installed bits. So
you might have
Hi,
if the server sits in a RFC1918 network (192.168.1.0/16), has a static
IP and a configured gateway and DNS, it might be reasonable to assume,
the dhcpd should operate in this range and set the options for DNS and
gateway accordingly.
At least the installation could produce a sample-confi
Hi,
dhcpd is just an (maybe bad) example.
But even dhcpd needs a lot of work. I need to configure ranges, options
(which could like gateqway and dns partly automagically gathered from
the exsting network configuration), ... binding dhcpd to bind to enable
dynamic updates, ...
and double thi
Most of the services you described do have a "working" configuration but
the service is not turned on. You are right though, when you install a
Windows CA it's ready to go. In regards to DHCP, the dhcpd.conf file has
a commented sample that needs to be edited and then turned on. Is this
what yo
Once upon a time, Robert M. Albrecht said:
> If I install a Windows-Server with some services like DHCP or file
> services, I get a working configuration.
Can you be more specific on what you mean by "working configuration"?
As far as I know, you still have to configure the service on Windows
bef
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2014 01:50 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 19:31:58 +0100, "Robert M. Albrecht"
> wrote:
>>
>> I think this is a real problem. The missing working
>> default-configs are a real hassle for replacing small servers in
>> Wi
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 19:31:58 +0100,
"Robert M. Albrecht" wrote:
I think this is a real problem. The missing working default-configs
are a real hassle for replacing small servers in Windows-shops with
Linux as the non-expert-Linux-admin has an enormous entry-barrier to
get some minumum
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/27/2014 01:31 PM, Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
> Hi,
>
> might be totaly out of scope for Fedora.next, but this is what I
> would like to get better in Fedora.
>
> If I install a Windows-Server with some services like DHCP or file
> services, I g
18 matches
Mail list logo
