> I would prefer separate "gadget" and "ethernet". This way it is easier
> to distinguish them in possible UI etc.

The service name starts with the network name, so are you suggesting the
creation a new network type, CONNMAN_NETWORK_TYPE_GADGET?


On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:43 AM, Jukka Rissanen <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Glenn,
>
> On ke, 2014-01-22 at 20:42 -0500, Glenn Schmottlach wrote:
> > > PPP links have not really ever been considered and nobody has any
> > > current plans to support them either.
> >
> > I saw what (might) appear to be the start of a PPP plugin in the
> > Connman repo in the "scripts" folder under libppp-plugin.c. Do you
> > know the intention/purpose of that plug-in? It appears to use the PPPD
> > library to implement some features related to PPP.
> >
> > > The working assumption once upon a time was to use the device running
> > > ConnMan as the one tethering its connection to a laptop nearby, thus
> the
> > > implementation where ConnMan shares its connection to others.
> >
> > I understand this use case and assume you realize my use-case is the
> > polar-opposite. In my scenario the Connman device is in fact tethered
> > to another device (via Gadget Ethernet-USB) that provides WAN
> > connectivity. Specially, I'm working on an IVI platform attached to a
> > telematics module which serves as a brigde to the WAN. I imagine this
> > could be an equally compelling use-case for Connman given GENIVI's
> > interest in using it as a network manager for the car.
> >
> > > struct connman_service to everybody else. There were some patches
> > > floating around last autumn, but the author of those patches
> disappeared
> > > soon afterwards.
> > >
> >
> > I discovered this discussion from April 2013 here:
> >
> > https://lists.connman.net/pipermail/connman/2013-April/013957.html
> >
> > and patches offered here:
> >
> > https://lists.connman.net/pipermail/connman/2013-April/013965.html
> >
> > Can I assume this is the topic you were referring to? I contacted the
> > author of the patches and it seems increased workload prevented him
> > from properly submit all the necessary patches.
>
> Yes, these are the relevant patches. Note that I implemented the USB
> tethering in v1.17, so some part of the from patches from April need not
> to be done.
>
> >
> > With that said, I would like to pick up where he left off and try to
> > formulate a series of patches that the Connman maintainers would
> > consider merging into the base-line. Unfortunately, I need some
> > feedback on several questions regarding such an implementation. I ask
> > only to minimize the number of changes necessary to get these changes
> > submitted and accepted by you.
>
> Patches are welcome as usual.
>
> >
> > Here are my questions:
> >
> > 1) Some of the structure/function names in ethernet.c are a bit
> > mis-leading with the introduction of partial Gadget support. As in the
> > earlier patch (above) I'm inclined to slightly modify some of these
> > private names so the intent is clearer. Would you accept such changes?
>
> I would say yes, please fix the name to be logical if you wish.
>
> >
> > 2) It appears the functions for the Gadget "device" driver are
> > effectively empty. My intention is to substitute the gadget_XXXX
> > functions with their ethernet_driver equivalents since that appears to
> > be the behavior I want. One approach is to use the ethernet driver
> > functions directly in the Gadget device driver structure. Another is
> > to call these ethernet driver functions from the Gadget driver
> > function implementations. The third is to copy the content of the
> > ethernet driver functions into the corresponding Gadget driver
> > functions (effectively making copies). Which approach would you prefer
> > and likely accept?
>
> Note that ethernet and usb gadget ethernet work somewhat differently.
> When ethernet is plugged in we automatically power if on, for usb gadget
> ethernet, we should power the device only when there is a real
> connection. I saw this error when trying the patches in last April.
>
> >
> > 3) There is a static "eth_tethering" flag in ethernet.c. This seems to
> > imply that all ethernet devices are either supporting tethering or
> > not. Is this the intention? It's not clear how this flag would impact
> > Gadget devices? Can you elaborate on the intent/purpose of this
> > private global variable. It might seem this should be included in the
> > ethernet device data (per instance) rather than globally applying to
> > all ethernet devices. I'm likely mis-understanding the intent.
> >
> > 4) I'd argue the service name generated for a Gadget service should in
> > fact include "ethernet" rather than "gadget" as was suggested in the
> > earlier thread above. Truly, the Gadget device is providing an
> > ethernet "service" instead of a "gadget" service which seems more akin
> > to a particular bearer (like USB perhaps). Perhaps you could clarify
> > your reasoning? I am inclined to maintain the current behavior.
>
> I would prefer separate "gadget" and "ethernet". This way it is easier
> to distinguish them in possible UI etc.
>
> >
> > 5) Do you have any suggestions on the service "weight" that should be
> > assigned to a gadget service type? I'm inclined to list it just below
> > Ethernet since it is a hard-wired connection.
>
> Sounds ok to me.
>
> >
> > 6) For the "service2bearer()" function in session.c, would
> > CONNMAN_SERVICE_TYPE_GADGET be something like "usb"? Likewise for
> > bearer2service()?
> >
> > 7) There was mention in the above threads about adding a global
> > configuration item to main.conf. What is not clear is the
> > intent/purpose of that variable. Can you elaborate?
>
> Probably this is not relevant anymore.
>
> >
> > Sorry for bombarding you with so many questions. I am trying to
> > understand the design approach so any patches I produce are easier to
> > accept and integrate. Likely, I may have more questions as I begin the
> > implementation.
> >
> > Thanks for your insights and understanding . . .
>
> Thank you, and we are waiting to see your patches.
>
> >
> > Glenn
>
>
> Cheers,
> Jukka
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> connman mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.connman.net/mailman/listinfo/connman
>
_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.connman.net/mailman/listinfo/connman

Reply via email to