<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - RFE: please introduce more special targets for facilities like entropy, or netfilter rules" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80169#c9">Comment # 9</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - RFE: please introduce more special targets for facilities like entropy, or netfilter rules" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80169">bug 80169</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:zbyszek@in.waw.pl" title="Zbigniew Jedrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@in.waw.pl>"> Zbigniew Jedrzejewski-Szmek</a> <pre>network-pre.target means "network prerequisites" as much as "before network". This name is good because it follows the general naming, and we can easy have a number of such targets (remote-fs-pre, network-pre, cryptsetup-pre, ...). This is good because there's an established pattern and there isn't an additional name to remember. Also, it stays in the realm of systemd dependency language. OTOH, systemd cannot really make any promises that the network is secure, even after network-secured.target has been reached. *That* is something that we don't to do. I see some merit in adding a firewall.target, with the meaning "firewall has been configured". This would provide a measure of interchangedness between various firewall configuration mechanisms. Would that work for you?</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>