Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[James Hogarth]

On 4 May 2017 at 12:44, James Hogarth  wrote:
> On 8 March 2017 at 11:19, James Hogarth  wrote:
>> On 8 March 2017 at 11:15, Alice Wonder  wrote:
>>> On 03/08/2017 01:57 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:


> The recommended configuration for EL7 is to use NetworkManager unless
> you have a very specific edge case preventing you from doing so:
>
 The truth is a lot of us run servers that don't need to have their
 network "managed" by Networkmanager.

>>>
>>> My experience was very difficult going to 7.2 to 7.3 because of a change in
>>> the behavior of NetworkManager with respect to IPv6 but once I had it
>>> figured out (thanks to people on this list) it worked out quite well and I
>>> kept NetworkManager.
>>>
>>> But I certainly understand why some don't want to do that.
>>
>>
>> That's fine Alice (and I remember your issue well with the minimally
>> documented change to stable-privacy by default for new systems ...
>> argh I still need to write up a blog article about that) but in this
>> case the person concerned isn't even using the network service, which
>> if legacy and semi-deprecated is still supported, but just doing a
>> ridiculous and unsupportable mini script (I'm guessing from rc.local?)
>> which doesn't handle pretty much any actual networking issue that may
>> come up - eg failed/delayed interface.
>
> Apologies for the slight necro but I felt this thread was the closest
> linked to the topic, and since it was of interest to Alice at the time
> may be of interest to others too.
>
> I've just finished up and published my NetworkManager rebased article
> covering the changes (focusing on behavioural ones):
>
> https://www.hogarthuk.com/?q=node/18
>
> I do like the idea of my wifi mac being able to be set to random by
> default now ... I may well enable that as a default (to handle
> trivially the use case of unknown public wifi) and toggle it to
> preserve or stable for my known standard connections.
>
> The master-slave style connections (whether vlan, bond, team or
> bridge) are much easier to deal with now as well at the command line,
> something I'm very happy to see.

And for those interested in the NM changes Fedora Magazine just published this:

https://fedoramagazine.org/networkmanager-changes-improvements/

I'm of reasonable confidence we'll see another bump in the NM version
at 7.4 when it eventually hits beta so it's worth looking out for the
NM 1.6.0 and 1.8.0 changes.

`nmcli -g  con sh ` will be lovely for
scripting for instance and MACsec may see some love on corporate
networks.

There doesn't look to be any behaviour level changes that will be
breaking like Alice faced before though ... some outputs to differ if
you are parsing specifically so check that.

One example that jumped out to me today was connection.zone (if using
NetworkManager to define the firewalld zone of a connection which is
not common yet) changes from "--" to "" when it's not defined.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2017 at 11:19, James Hogarth  wrote:
> On 8 March 2017 at 11:15, Alice Wonder  wrote:
>> On 03/08/2017 01:57 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:
>>>
>>>
 The recommended configuration for EL7 is to use NetworkManager unless
 you have a very specific edge case preventing you from doing so:

>>> The truth is a lot of us run servers that don't need to have their
>>> network "managed" by Networkmanager.
>>>
>>
>> My experience was very difficult going to 7.2 to 7.3 because of a change in
>> the behavior of NetworkManager with respect to IPv6 but once I had it
>> figured out (thanks to people on this list) it worked out quite well and I
>> kept NetworkManager.
>>
>> But I certainly understand why some don't want to do that.
>
>
> That's fine Alice (and I remember your issue well with the minimally
> documented change to stable-privacy by default for new systems ...
> argh I still need to write up a blog article about that) but in this
> case the person concerned isn't even using the network service, which
> if legacy and semi-deprecated is still supported, but just doing a
> ridiculous and unsupportable mini script (I'm guessing from rc.local?)
> which doesn't handle pretty much any actual networking issue that may
> come up - eg failed/delayed interface.

Apologies for the slight necro but I felt this thread was the closest
linked to the topic, and since it was of interest to Alice at the time
may be of interest to others too.

I've just finished up and published my NetworkManager rebased article
covering the changes (focusing on behavioural ones):

https://www.hogarthuk.com/?q=node/18

I do like the idea of my wifi mac being able to be set to random by
default now ... I may well enable that as a default (to handle
trivially the use case of unknown public wifi) and toggle it to
preserve or stable for my known standard connections.

The master-slave style connections (whether vlan, bond, team or
bridge) are much easier to deal with now as well at the command line,
something I'm very happy to see.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Giles Coochey]

On 09/03/17 09:28, John Hodrien wrote:


I'll obviously argue I wasn't scaremongering.  You can start with 
CentOS, and
do anything you like with it, and as I've said, you're absolutely free 
to do
that.  But at some point, you have to accept that what you've got left 
isn't
CentOS.  If you don't use what the distribution provides, what you're 
doing
isn't the distribution.  Given you're getting no formal support on 
this, that
possibly means little to you, but don't be surprised by the community 
backing
away from providing unofficial support to something that's no longer 
CentOS.


You see this sort of thing in a more extreme way with things like cPanel.
Well, let's put it this way, the more someone argues that I need to run 
some software that I clearly don't need, the more I become suspicious of 
what that software is doing. The network configuration of my servers is 
static, it doesn't need to be changed once the server has booted up. So 
it doesn't need some piece of software running away doing goodness knows 
what... I'm just going to be waiting for it to bug or error out and 
leave me high and dry without a network config.


I am not trying to suggest of encourage people to emulate what I have 
done, I have just been making a point that if you want to run something 
to manage your network configuration, and your network configuration is 
clearly not going to change, then it might be simpler to hardcode that 
configuration.


In any case, two alternatives have come out of this thread, the networkd 
alternative, and the configure-and-exit parameter to NetworkManager.


I think it best we leave this thread to die, and accept that others will 
not always do things your way and/or the Redhat/Centos way, but go on 
their own path, and they will probably be happy to accept that this is 
their own creation and the risks associated with that (no support / 
unknown behaviour in certain circumstances etc...). Their creation may 
address things that NetworkManager doesn't do in the future, and if 
adopted everyone will benefit.


Is this the Catherdral or the Bazaar?

--
Regards,

Giles Coochey
+44 (0) 7584 634 135
+44 (0) 1803 529 451
gi...@coochey.net


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[John Hodrien]

On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, isdtor wrote:


Did I see an implicit "do as Red Hat says or else" there somewhere? Not
appropriate. Linux is not Windows (yet). In the heat of the moment it may
easily be forgotton that Linux is all about choice. We choose to run CentOS,
and we choose to run it the way we see fit. We appreciate the efforts that
go into the *Community* *Enterprise* OS, and if you have dealt with buggy
crap like Ubuntu or Fedora, you appreciate it even more. This does not imply
deference to upstream.

That statement about "effectively [running] your own Linux distribution" is
scaremongering, at best. If there's one thing I've learned on this list,
it's realizing how many use cases, scenarios and solutions there are that
can make approaching the topic at hand without prejudice challenging at
times.


I'll obviously argue I wasn't scaremongering.  You can start with CentOS, and
do anything you like with it, and as I've said, you're absolutely free to do
that.  But at some point, you have to accept that what you've got left isn't
CentOS.  If you don't use what the distribution provides, what you're doing
isn't the distribution.  Given you're getting no formal support on this, that
possibly means little to you, but don't be surprised by the community backing
away from providing unofficial support to something that's no longer CentOS.

You see this sort of thing in a more extreme way with things like cPanel.

jh
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[James Hogarth]

On 9 March 2017 at 00:54, isdtor  wrote:
> Did I see an implicit "do as Red Hat says or else" there somewhere? Not 
> appropriate. Linux is not Windows (yet). In the heat of the moment it may 
> easily be forgotton that Linux is all about choice. We choose to run CentOS, 
> and we choose to run it the way we see fit. We appreciate the efforts that go 
> into the *Community* *Enterprise* OS, and if you have dealt with buggy crap 
> like Ubuntu or Fedora, you appreciate it even more. This does not imply 
> deference to upstream.
>
> That statement about "effectively [running] your own Linux distribution" is 
> scaremongering, at best. If there's one thing I've learned on this list, it's 
> realizing how many use cases, scenarios and solutions there are that can make 
> approaching the topic at hand without prejudice challenging at times.
>

You're reaching here.

It's simply there is good advice and sane management practices, and
there's bad advice and approaches to manage systems that have plenty
of clear issues and step way outside of the documented and supported
methods of handling things.

If you want to use a random script that has so many issues it's even
less supportable than the legacy network service, more power to you!
Just don't advise people entering into this area to do that and don't
expect much help from those more knowledgeable in those areas who
spend their own time assisting on the mailing list and IRC if you
insist on jumping off the cliff with your homemade parachute after
people have pointed out that patching it with small bits of cloth
wasn't the best of ideas ...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[isdtor]

Did I see an implicit "do as Red Hat says or else" there somewhere? Not 
appropriate. Linux is not Windows (yet). In the heat of the moment it may 
easily be forgotton that Linux is all about choice. We choose to run CentOS, 
and we choose to run it the way we see fit. We appreciate the efforts that go 
into the *Community* *Enterprise* OS, and if you have dealt with buggy crap 
like Ubuntu or Fedora, you appreciate it even more. This does not imply 
deference to upstream.

That statement about "effectively [running] your own Linux distribution" is 
scaremongering, at best. If there's one thing I've learned on this list, it's 
realizing how many use cases, scenarios and solutions there are that can make 
approaching the topic at hand without prejudice challenging at times.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2017 at 15:00, Giles Coochey  wrote:
>
>
> On 08/03/17 14:54, Jonathan Billings wrote:
>>
>>
>> If you'd like a really simple solution that avoids NetworkManager, I
>> suggest using systemd-networkd (both systemd-networkd and
>> systemd-resolved packages required).  I've used it to set up a bridge
>> on my workstattion for use with libvirtd/kvm, and it is just as simple
>> a text file but future compatible.  Heck, it probably even works on
>> other distros that use systemd.
>>
>> Here's a super-simple static configuration:
>>
>> # cat /etc/systemd/network/10-static-eno1.network
>> [Match]
>> name=eno1
>>
>> [Network]
>> Address=192.168.1.2
>> Gateway=192.168.1.1
>> DNS=192.168.1.1
>>
>> You need to make sure that /etc/resolv.conf is a symlink
>> /run/systemd/resolve/resolv.conf if you want the systemd-resolved
>> service to manage it.  Just disable NetworkManager and network
>> services and enable the systemd-networkd and systemd-resolved
>> services.
>>
>> Honestly, I've found systemd-networkd very useful for the more complex
>> networking on my workstation (bridged VMs to external network) but its
>> also useful for my tiny VMs that don't need extra daemons running.
>>
> That's interesting, I'll snapshot and perhaps take that tangent on the next
> build and see how it goes.
>

Incidentally as far back as NM 1.0 (part of the 7.1 milestone but not
part of the original 7.0 GA) it has supported a
'configure-and-quit=yes' option to just get the configuration right,
emit the events etc needed to tell services/system network is
configured and then get out of the way and not leave any running
daemon:

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/tree/NEWS?h=1.0.0

I'll give that a test as part of my upcoming article looking at how NM
has changed since the original 7.0 release.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Giles Coochey]

On 08/03/17 14:54, Jonathan Billings wrote:


If you'd like a really simple solution that avoids NetworkManager, I
suggest using systemd-networkd (both systemd-networkd and
systemd-resolved packages required).  I've used it to set up a bridge
on my workstattion for use with libvirtd/kvm, and it is just as simple
a text file but future compatible.  Heck, it probably even works on
other distros that use systemd.

Here's a super-simple static configuration:

# cat /etc/systemd/network/10-static-eno1.network
[Match]
name=eno1

[Network]
Address=192.168.1.2
Gateway=192.168.1.1
DNS=192.168.1.1

You need to make sure that /etc/resolv.conf is a symlink
/run/systemd/resolve/resolv.conf if you want the systemd-resolved
service to manage it.  Just disable NetworkManager and network
services and enable the systemd-networkd and systemd-resolved
services.

Honestly, I've found systemd-networkd very useful for the more complex
networking on my workstation (bridged VMs to external network) but its
also useful for my tiny VMs that don't need extra daemons running.

That's interesting, I'll snapshot and perhaps take that tangent on the 
next build and see how it goes.


--
Regards,

Giles Coochey
+44 (0) 7584 634 135
+44 (0) 1803 529 451
gi...@coochey.net


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Jonathan Billings]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 10:43:57AM +, Giles Coochey wrote:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
> 
> I'm not flaming NetworkManager, I'm just stating that for many (perhaps
> most), it is over-engineered for a server orientated distribution. I can run
> with the script above on 30 server instances, and it doesn't, as yet, break
> any of the other features of Centos that I enjoy.

If you'd like a really simple solution that avoids NetworkManager, I
suggest using systemd-networkd (both systemd-networkd and
systemd-resolved packages required).  I've used it to set up a bridge
on my workstattion for use with libvirtd/kvm, and it is just as simple
a text file but future compatible.  Heck, it probably even works on
other distros that use systemd.

Here's a super-simple static configuration:

# cat /etc/systemd/network/10-static-eno1.network
[Match]
name=eno1

[Network]
Address=192.168.1.2
Gateway=192.168.1.1
DNS=192.168.1.1

You need to make sure that /etc/resolv.conf is a symlink
/run/systemd/resolve/resolv.conf if you want the systemd-resolved
service to manage it.  Just disable NetworkManager and network
services and enable the systemd-networkd and systemd-resolved
services.

Honestly, I've found systemd-networkd very useful for the more complex
networking on my workstation (bridged VMs to external network) but its
also useful for my tiny VMs that don't need extra daemons running.

-- 
Jonathan Billings 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Giles Coochey]

On 08/03/17 13:16, Steve Clark wrote:


Let us have a vote - how many of us do teaming/bonding/vlans on our servers?
Our networking gear does that in our installation.

The majority of my servers are virtual, if I need multiple subnets 
(VLANs) then I have multiple cards.
Their throughput does not require bonding, resiliency is performed at a 
different level - by having multiple load balanced VMs.


I have to admit, on one hypervisor I use  VLANs, but actually use 
NetworkManager in that case - and it worked since installation, if I 
have a problem with it in the future though, I will resort to scripting 
it as well :-) - It would be the simplest way for me to resolve the 
issue - I can't afford to wait for patches to a monolithic, as you say, 
black-box system, which is in effect just trying to apply sanity 
checking a bunch of scripts in the first place.


I don't add VLANs and Bonds on my servers for _fun_, they are there to 
run the applications and infrastructure - faffing around with that once 
a server is in production is just asking for trouble.


--
Regards,

Giles Coochey
+44 (0) 7584 634 135
+44 (0) 1803 529 451
gi...@coochey.net


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2017 at 13:16, Steve Clark  wrote:
> On 03/08/2017 07:39 AM, John Hodrien wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Steve Clark wrote:
>>
>>> Yes it is really hard!
>>>
>>> ip address add 192.168.0.1/24 dev enp0s25
>>> ip route add default via 192.168.0.254 dev enp0s25
>>> echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
>>> echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf
>> This is still a deliberately trivial case, as already said, with no
>> teaming/bonding/vlan type fun in the mix.
> Let us have a vote - how many of us do teaming/bonding/vlans on our servers?
> Our networking gear does that in our installation.
>
>

That makes little sense ...

Without cooperation of both endpoints (switch and host) LACP is not
possible (and this is generally the preferred teaming/bonding method).

Without cooperation of both endpoints (switch and host) trunking
multiple vlans (ie the time you would actually tag) is not possible.

That ridiculous "script" doesn't even handle the basic situation that
the NIC interface didn't come up for any reason ...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Andreas Benzler]

Hello David,

It was not to flame something about NetworkManager. There some
application that "needs" to wheel the old way.

I would never have thought it would be such an enlightenment for such a
small, old thing.

1. There is a file that isn't always needed (/etc/sysconfig/network)
2. I wanne have the same result in the old style. (NOZEROCONF=yes)

And just by the way. My Desktop computer here runs with the
NetworkManager.

1. Outside lan

2. A dummy bridge adapter fired by the NetworkManager
   (With a island name server + dhcp for kvm)

3. An internal lan that can also run an Centos Diskless computer.


That was not my intention; really not.

For a network starter it is an absolute must to know, how it works in
practically. Not me.

Sorry 

  to 
 everyone


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Steve Clark]

On 03/08/2017 07:39 AM, John Hodrien wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Steve Clark wrote:
>
>> Yes it is really hard!
>>
>> ip address add 192.168.0.1/24 dev enp0s25
>> ip route add default via 192.168.0.254 dev enp0s25
>> echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
>> echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf
> This is still a deliberately trivial case, as already said, with no
> teaming/bonding/vlan type fun in the mix.
Let us have a vote - how many of us do teaming/bonding/vlans on our servers?
Our networking gear does that in our installation.

> You're free to disentangle yourself from the bits of CentOS you don't like,
> and there's nothing at all stopping you, but after a while what you're
> supporting isn't CentOS.  I realise this is only one little part of the whole,
> but still.
>
> jh
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


-- 
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves Managed Services, LLC.*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com
http://www.netwolves.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[John Hodrien]

On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Steve Clark wrote:


Yes it is really hard!

ip address add 192.168.0.1/24 dev enp0s25
ip route add default via 192.168.0.254 dev enp0s25
echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf


This is still a deliberately trivial case, as already said, with no
teaming/bonding/vlan type fun in the mix.

You're free to disentangle yourself from the bits of CentOS you don't like,
and there's nothing at all stopping you, but after a while what you're
supporting isn't CentOS.  I realise this is only one little part of the whole,
but still.

jh
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[David Both]

On 03/08/2017 05:43 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:



On 08/03/17 10:38, John Hodrien wrote:

On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Giles Coochey wrote:


ifconfig enp0s25 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
route add default gw 192.168.0.254 enp0s25
echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf


Oh okay, you really do want to back away from Redhat entirely. That's
entirely your choice.

What you end up with if you take this approach widely is effectively
your own
linux distribution.

Not really, Redhat/Centos has a lot to offer, but for me, networking 
is a one-time configuration, and the best way to configure it is using 
something that falls within this principle:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle

I'm not flaming NetworkManager, I'm just stating that for many 
(perhaps most), it is over-engineered for a server orientated 
distribution. I can run with the script above on 30 server instances, 
and it doesn't, as yet, break any of the other features of Centos that 
I enjoy.


I do not agree with your conclusions about NetworkManager.  First, I use 
it on several servers and firewalls that - theoretically at least - 
should never change. Some of the most tiresome problems I have had to 
fix were what happened due to renaming of NICs after replacing a bad 
one, or a 100Mb with a Gb NIC, or adding a new NIC to connect with a new 
network. NetworkManager keeps NIC naming consistent with no surprises. I 
am getting ready to install two new NICs in a firewall/router that 
already has two NICs and I am not dreading that change as I would have 
with the old network service.


I have had excellent results with NetworkManager and am very happy with 
it. I see it as a significant improvement over the old network service. 
If you are concerned about performance issues - don't worry - you won't 
have any. It works fine on my RaspberryPI forewall/router using CentOS 7 
for ARM and on my ancient EeePC that runs a full installation of Fedora 25.


Don't try to fix something that isn't broken.

--


*
David P. Both, RHCE
Millennium Technology Consulting LLC
Raleigh, NC, USA
919-389-8678

db...@millennium-technology.com

www.millennium-technology.com
www.databook.bz - Home of the DataBook for Linux
DataBook is a Registered Trademark of David Both
*
This communication may be unlawfully collected and stored by the National
Security Agency (NSA) in secret. The parties to this email do not consent to the
retrieving or storing of this communication and any related metadata, as well as
printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using it. If you
believe you have received this communication in error, please delete it
immediately.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Steve Clark]

On 03/08/2017 05:52 AM, John Hodrien wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Giles Coochey wrote:
>
>> Not really, Redhat/Centos has a lot to offer, but for me, networking is a 
>> one-time configuration, and the best way to configure it is using something 
>> that falls within this principle:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
>>
>> I'm not flaming NetworkManager, I'm just stating that for many (perhaps 
>> most), it is over-engineered for a server orientated distribution. I can run 
>> with the script above on 30 server instances, and it doesn't, as yet, break 
>> any of the other features of Centos that I enjoy.
> It means you're stuck in your own hand crafted niche.  Which is fine, but it's
> up to you to maintain the niche, or you find yourself using obsolete tools
> like ifconfig and route.
>
> I'd argue there's a gulf between keeping things simple and doing things your
> own way.
>
> jh

Yes it is really hard!

ip address add 192.168.0.1/24 dev enp0s25
ip route add default via 192.168.0.254 dev enp0s25
echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf




-- 
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves Managed Services, LLC.*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com
http://www.netwolves.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Andreas Benzler]

Certain application doesn't like the NetworkManager

for example take a look here.


https://www.rdoproject.org/install/quickstart/


And on server stage it's better to run without 
any complicate configuration tools.

Tools can make life harder in some cases.

Got many other distros run before centos, why not.

I personally like it slim and easy. 


Sincerely

Andy


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Steve Clark]

On 03/08/2017 05:43 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:
>
> On 08/03/17 10:38, John Hodrien wrote:
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Giles Coochey wrote:
>>
>>> ifconfig enp0s25 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
>>> route add default gw 192.168.0.254 enp0s25
>>> echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
>>> echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf
>> Oh okay, you really do want to back away from Redhat entirely. That's
>> entirely your choice.
>>
>> What you end up with if you take this approach widely is effectively
>> your own
>> linux distribution.
>>
> Not really, Redhat/Centos has a lot to offer, but for me, networking is 
> a one-time configuration, and the best way to configure it is using 
> something that falls within this principle:
I agree - they are trying to make it like windows, and when something doesn't 
work correctly you
have no clue what is going on in the black box!

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle
>
> I'm not flaming NetworkManager, I'm just stating that for many (perhaps 
> most), it is over-engineered for a server orientated distribution. I can 
> run with the script above on 30 server instances, and it doesn't, as 
> yet, break any of the other features of Centos that I enjoy.
>


-- 
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves Managed Services, LLC.*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: steve.cl...@netwolves.com
http://www.netwolves.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Andreas Benzler]

Hello James,

your right in that position. I will correct it.

Sincerely

Andy


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2017 at 11:15, Alice Wonder  wrote:
> On 03/08/2017 01:57 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The recommended configuration for EL7 is to use NetworkManager unless
>>> you have a very specific edge case preventing you from doing so:
>>>
>> The truth is a lot of us run servers that don't need to have their
>> network "managed" by Networkmanager.
>>
>
> My experience was very difficult going to 7.2 to 7.3 because of a change in
> the behavior of NetworkManager with respect to IPv6 but once I had it
> figured out (thanks to people on this list) it worked out quite well and I
> kept NetworkManager.
>
> But I certainly understand why some don't want to do that.


That's fine Alice (and I remember your issue well with the minimally
documented change to stable-privacy by default for new systems ...
argh I still need to write up a blog article about that) but in this
case the person concerned isn't even using the network service, which
if legacy and semi-deprecated is still supported, but just doing a
ridiculous and unsupportable mini script (I'm guessing from rc.local?)
which doesn't handle pretty much any actual networking issue that may
come up - eg failed/delayed interface.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Alice Wonder]

On 03/08/2017 01:57 AM, Giles Coochey wrote:



The recommended configuration for EL7 is to use NetworkManager unless
you have a very specific edge case preventing you from doing so:


The truth is a lot of us run servers that don't need to have their
network "managed" by Networkmanager.



My experience was very difficult going to 7.2 to 7.3 because of a change 
in the behavior of NetworkManager with respect to IPv6 but once I had it 
figured out (thanks to people on this list) it worked out quite well and 
I kept NetworkManager.


But I certainly understand why some don't want to do that.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Giles Coochey]

On 08/03/17 11:10, James Hogarth wrote:

On 8 March 2017 at 10:58, Giles Coochey  wrote:


On 08/03/17 10:52, John Hodrien wrote:


It means you're stuck in your own hand crafted niche.  Which is fine, but
it's
up to you to maintain the niche, or you find yourself using obsolete tools
like ifconfig and route.

I'd argue there's a gulf between keeping things simple and doing things
your
own way.


I'm sure there are drop in replacements for ifconfig and route, but even if
deprecated I have not needed to revisit that script for many years, so I'm
not changing it.
When it does eventually break I have to look at four lines to discover where
the problem might be, I can troubleshoot it by trying to run each line
manually and see what is going on.

When qw hit a bug in NetworkManager that breaks something specific that
you're doing then you can try to raise a bug with upstream, or you could try
to review the thousands of lines of code that make it up and try to fix the
problem yourself.

Or perhaps you'll do what I did, remove it and put in a 4 line script.



That's nice ... but what you've provided is terrible advice that
doesn't handle a wide range of scenarios such as teaming, bonding,
vlans, bridging, network interface changes, race conditions of things
dependent on networking or acting as part of the network.target or
network-online.target systemd units which declare when network is
ready ...

If you want to do something unsupportable in any sane environment that
is on you ... but really please don't suggest to those who don't know
better to carry out such activities.

I didn't suggest you use anything, you asked me what script I used, I 
gave you that information YMMV.


--
Regards,

Giles Coochey
+44 (0) 7584 634 135
+44 (0) 1803 529 451
gi...@coochey.net


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2017 at 10:58, Giles Coochey  wrote:
>
>
> On 08/03/17 10:52, John Hodrien wrote:
>>
>>
>> It means you're stuck in your own hand crafted niche.  Which is fine, but
>> it's
>> up to you to maintain the niche, or you find yourself using obsolete tools
>> like ifconfig and route.
>>
>> I'd argue there's a gulf between keeping things simple and doing things
>> your
>> own way.
>>
> I'm sure there are drop in replacements for ifconfig and route, but even if
> deprecated I have not needed to revisit that script for many years, so I'm
> not changing it.
> When it does eventually break I have to look at four lines to discover where
> the problem might be, I can troubleshoot it by trying to run each line
> manually and see what is going on.
>
> When qw hit a bug in NetworkManager that breaks something specific that
> you're doing then you can try to raise a bug with upstream, or you could try
> to review the thousands of lines of code that make it up and try to fix the
> problem yourself.
>
> Or perhaps you'll do what I did, remove it and put in a 4 line script.
>


That's nice ... but what you've provided is terrible advice that
doesn't handle a wide range of scenarios such as teaming, bonding,
vlans, bridging, network interface changes, race conditions of things
dependent on networking or acting as part of the network.target or
network-online.target systemd units which declare when network is
ready ...

If you want to do something unsupportable in any sane environment that
is on you ... but really please don't suggest to those who don't know
better to carry out such activities.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Giles Coochey]

On 08/03/17 10:52, John Hodrien wrote:


It means you're stuck in your own hand crafted niche.  Which is fine, 
but it's
up to you to maintain the niche, or you find yourself using obsolete 
tools

like ifconfig and route.

I'd argue there's a gulf between keeping things simple and doing 
things your

own way.

I'm sure there are drop in replacements for ifconfig and route, but even 
if deprecated I have not needed to revisit that script for many years, 
so I'm not changing it.
When it does eventually break I have to look at four lines to discover 
where the problem might be, I can troubleshoot it by trying to run each 
line manually and see what is going on.


When qw hit a bug in NetworkManager that breaks something specific that 
you're doing then you can try to raise a bug with upstream, or you could 
try to review the thousands of lines of code that make it up and try to 
fix the problem yourself.


Or perhaps you'll do what I did, remove it and put in a 4 line script.

--
Regards,

Giles Coochey
+44 (0) 7584 634 135
+44 (0) 1803 529 451
gi...@coochey.net


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[John Hodrien]

On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Giles Coochey wrote:

Not really, Redhat/Centos has a lot to offer, but for me, networking is a 
one-time configuration, and the best way to configure it is using something 
that falls within this principle:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle

I'm not flaming NetworkManager, I'm just stating that for many (perhaps 
most), it is over-engineered for a server orientated distribution. I can run 
with the script above on 30 server instances, and it doesn't, as yet, break 
any of the other features of Centos that I enjoy.


It means you're stuck in your own hand crafted niche.  Which is fine, but it's
up to you to maintain the niche, or you find yourself using obsolete tools
like ifconfig and route.

I'd argue there's a gulf between keeping things simple and doing things your
own way.

jh
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Giles Coochey]

On 08/03/17 10:38, John Hodrien wrote:

On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Giles Coochey wrote:


ifconfig enp0s25 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
route add default gw 192.168.0.254 enp0s25
echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf


Oh okay, you really do want to back away from Redhat entirely. That's
entirely your choice.

What you end up with if you take this approach widely is effectively
your own
linux distribution.

Not really, Redhat/Centos has a lot to offer, but for me, networking is 
a one-time configuration, and the best way to configure it is using 
something that falls within this principle:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle

I'm not flaming NetworkManager, I'm just stating that for many (perhaps 
most), it is over-engineered for a server orientated distribution. I can 
run with the script above on 30 server instances, and it doesn't, as 
yet, break any of the other features of Centos that I enjoy.


--
Regards,

Giles Coochey
+44 (0) 7584 634 135
+44 (0) 1803 529 451
gi...@coochey.net

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[John Hodrien]

On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Giles Coochey wrote:


ifconfig enp0s25 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
route add default gw 192.168.0.254 enp0s25
echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf


Oh okay, you really do want to back away from Redhat entirely.  That's
entirely your choice.

What you end up with if you take this approach widely is effectively your own
linux distribution.

jh
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Giles Coochey]

On 08/03/17 10:15, John Hodrien wrote:

On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Giles Coochey wrote:

The truth is a lot of us run servers that don't need to have their 
network

"managed" by Networkmanager.


You're opting to have your network managed by a bunch of unloved legacy
scripts that you're advised to avoid using unless necessary, or you've 
having
it managed by NetworkManager.  If you want to have it managing it this 
way,

you'll be writing your own scripts.

We just need to set an IP address, subnet mask, gateway, and DNS 
servers and we will never be changing that configuration ever again 
for the entire life of the server.
Any 3-4 line script that does the job is sufficient, servers don't 
need gimmicks, they're not going to be hotspotting on wireless 
networks, the cable goes in, the server enters production and that's it!


By 3-4 line script, I assume you mean the content of all the files in
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts that aren't your ifcfg files?


ifconfig enp0s25 192.168.0.1 netmask 255.255.255.0
route add default gw 192.168.0.254 enp0s25
echo nameserver 8.8.8.8 > /etc/resolv.conf
echo nameserver 8.8.4.4 >> /etc/resolv.conf

--
Regards,

Giles Coochey
+44 (0) 7584 634 135
+44 (0) 1803 529 451
gi...@coochey.net


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[John Hodrien]

On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Giles Coochey wrote:


The truth is a lot of us run servers that don't need to have their network
"managed" by Networkmanager.


You're opting to have your network managed by a bunch of unloved legacy
scripts that you're advised to avoid using unless necessary, or you've having
it managed by NetworkManager.  If you want to have it managing it this way,
you'll be writing your own scripts.

We just need to set an IP address, subnet mask, gateway, and DNS servers and 
we will never be changing that configuration ever again for the entire life 
of the server.
Any 3-4 line script that does the job is sufficient, servers don't need 
gimmicks, they're not going to be hotspotting on wireless networks, the cable 
goes in, the server enters production and that's it!


By 3-4 line script, I assume you mean the content of all the files in
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts that aren't your ifcfg files?

jh
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Giles Coochey]

The recommended configuration for EL7 is to use NetworkManager unless
you have a very specific edge case preventing you from doing so:

The truth is a lot of us run servers that don't need to have their 
network "managed" by Networkmanager.


We just need to set an IP address, subnet mask, gateway, and DNS servers 
and we will never be changing that configuration ever again for the 
entire life of the server.
Any 3-4 line script that does the job is sufficient, servers don't need 
gimmicks, they're not going to be hotspotting on wireless networks, the 
cable goes in, the server enters production and that's it!


--
Regards,

Giles Coochey
+44 (0) 7584 634 135
+44 (0) 1803 529 451
gi...@coochey.net


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[James Hogarth]

On 8 March 2017 at 06:56, Andreas Benzler  wrote:
> Hello Guys,
>
> update my post, because of a route from ipv6 on same networkcard,
> with only ipv4 enabled
>
> Sincerely
>
> Andy
>
>

Please accept this as honest constructive criticism from someone who
also likes to blog.

On EL7 this is really bad advice:

> systemctl stop NetworkManager; systemctl disable NetworkManager; systemctl 
> mask NetworkManager

You may be interested in this article of mine:
https://www.hogarthuk.com/?q=node/8

The recommended configuration for EL7 is to use NetworkManager unless
you have a very specific edge case preventing you from doing so:

https://access.redhat.com/solutions/783533

The legacy network service is in effect deprecated, like net-tools
was, as no new features are being released for it and no RFE's are
being accepted. All future work is on NetworkManager.

Note as well this article was last updated in 2014 - NetworkManager
has been updated to handle more use cases than back then.

As always it's best to check with the upstream documentation:

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Networking_Guide/index.html

Finally there was nothing to do with IPv6 in your article.

That address was an IPv4 address and the zeroconf stuff configures the
169.254.0.0/16 network as a 'local link' network on that interface.

If it was IPv6 it would have an address like
fe80::33bb:5a14:be57:1690/64 ... which is an IPv6 link local address.

Regards,

James
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Andreas Benzler]

Hello Guys,

update my post, because of a route from ipv6 on same networkcard,
with only ipv4 enabled

Sincerely

Andy


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Andreas Benzler]

Sorry:

Can be a bug, because /etc/sysconfig/network isn't nessesery.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] From Networkmanager to self managed configuration files

[Andreas Benzler]

I don't know who is intereseted in, 

http://www.centos.cms4all.org/index.php/2017/03/07/centos-7-the-journey-form-networkmanager-to-self-managed-network-configuration-files/

Can be a bug, because the isn't nessesery.

Sincerely

AndyBe


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos