Received: from out.migadu.com (out.migadu.com [91.121.223.63]) by nld3-dev1.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E12D0782B95 for <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 17:02:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (Migadu outbound); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 17:02:40 +0000 Authentication-Results: out.migadu.com; auth=pass (plain) Received: from wms1-eu-central.migadu.com (wms1-eu-central.migadu.com [172.104.244.218]) by out.migadu.com (Haraka/2.8.16) with ESMTPSA id 10A4FF2E-616F-446A-AF92-A0D64BF81C8C.1 envelope-from (authenticated bits=0) (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 verify=FAIL); Fri, 20 Mar 2020 17:02:40 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 17:02:40 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: RainLoop/1.12.1 From: "Ariadne Conill" Message-ID: <9afce4b2f8604239f2a4f28648b88eae@dereferenced.org> Subject: Re: Proposed change: drop busybox iproute2, always use real iproute2 To: "Natanael Copa" Cc: ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org In-Reply-To: <20200320095843.0d7d5fad@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> References: <20200320095843.0d7d5fad@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> DKIM-Signature: v=1;a=rsa-sha256;bh=y9gcdKtE8YkKCCbi7lcLM3bIbuNnwcd8j7ZCGd8L51g=;c=relaxed/simple;d=dereferenced.org;h=from:subject:date:to;s=default;b=W9kQbKSlu5PUpYy5P/EUKbcpko5NTAaf+P7dC4Ybn7aL0/KHV/DxcX8FGqZogCUkpXryvKI9LjtqKN4yEiL/QuNwMYyElSs0oeLuny/NxFiry2M94kUpwFLBElppy61PUkcVqqhg41UIN6JPt0N+SkATFHRWAvlKGsOOj4wivdk= Hello,=0A=0AOn March 20, 2020 3:58 AM, "Natanael Copa" wrote:=0A=0A> On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:29:55 +0000=0A> "Ariadne Conil= l" wrote:=0A> =0A>> Hello,=0A>> =0A>> I would = like to propose that we drop busybox iproute2, in favor of=0A>> always us= ing real iproute2.=0A>> =0A>> The primary reasons are:=0A>> =0A>> - Real = iproute2 has significantly advanced by comparison to the=0A>> busybox imp= lementation. While the busybox implementation is=0A>> passable for basic = tasks, it is lacking for more advanced=0A>> tasks.=0A> =0A> I think most = users does not need more than basic tasks like setting ip=0A> address.=0A= > =0A>> - Because of this, many tutorials concerning iproute2 provide=0A>= > advice that is not particularly useful to our default iproute2=0A>> imp= lementation.=0A>> - Because of that, many people recommend installing rea= l iproute2=0A>> anyway.=0A>> =0A>> Providing real iproute2 and removing t= he busybox implementation=0A>> results in approximately 1.4MiB increase i= n the base image.=0A>> =0A>> However, I think we get a *lot* for that 1.4= MiB -- iproute2 can=0A> =0A> The downside is that all the users that don'= t need those 1.4M will get=0A> that cost.=0A> =0A>> potentially replace i= fenslave and other utilities as well, but=0A>> we will need to adjust som= e of our ifupdown addon scripts to=0A>> handle this. In general, I think = it is a good move for us in=0A>> general, especially with the work being = done to enable service=0A>> isolation in VRFs and network namespaces that= is underway. By=0A>> switching the default implementation, users will be= able to make=0A>> use of these features out of the box.=0A>> =0A>> I wou= ld like to implement this next week before freeze if nobody=0A>> objects.= =0A> =0A> I vote for keeping busybox iproute2 and document that apk add i= proute2=0A> is needed for advanced use.=0A=0AAs responses are overwhelmin= gly not in favor of the proposal, I would=0Asay that it lacks consensus. = Therefore, I am not going to pursue it=0Ain Alpine further at this time.= =0A=0AThanks,=0AAriadne