[3291] in Release_7.7_team
Re: Athena Disconnected Operation White Paper Draft 2.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Fri May 24 18:49:33 2002
To: Derek Atkins <warlord@mit.edu>
Cc: Bill Cattey <wdc@mit.edu>, source-developers@mit.edu, release-team@mit.edu
From: tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Date: 24 May 2002 15:51:28 -0700
In-Reply-To: <sjmsn4hjhoe.fsf@kikki.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <87d6vlp3bj.fsf@becket.becket.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I have two comments:
I think Bill's whitepaper is a very good statement of the issues
involved and contains sensible recommendations. My only suggestion is
to very carefully split up the statement of the problems,
recommendations, and rationale. I could easily tell which was which,
but someone less confidently aware of the way things work now might
easily be totally baffled.
I think Derek's proposal is a little strange. Both Red Hat and
Debian, for example, already contain sophisticated systems for
automatically starting and stopping network services. They are not
perfect by any means, but rather than creating yet another scheme, I
would prefer to see, for example, the official Linux/Athena packages
interact the normal way with the existing Red Hat scheme.
In the case of Debian, this is doubly true, given the purposes of Sam
Hartman's recently announced project to make Debian work well for
Athena people including disconnected operation. I'm sure that this
scheme will hook into the existing network if-up.d and if-down.d idea.
However, don't get me wrong. *Anything* will be better than the
relative chaos of the present. If it really is easier to get Derek's
proposal working then that would be fabulous.
Thomas
