Re: network-manager as default? No!
Hi there! On Mon, 02 May 2011 03:03:51 +0200, Fernando Lemos wrote: 2011/5/1 Miroslav Suchý miros...@suchy.cz: Dne 3.4.2011 18:08, Fernando Lemos napsal(a): * It doesn't have a good command-line interface It does have CLI interface. Those commands are bundled directly in NetworkManager: nm-cli ^^ nmcli, without the dash, for I do not know which reason (and I was missing it because of that). nm-tool nm-online I'm not sure if this qualify as good command-line interface :) Those tools can't create or delete connections, which is kind of important, so no. ;-) Exactly, I was enjoying the moment when I found out that NM has CLI interfaces, then discovering that I could not do anything brought me back to my old loved manual setup (yes, through ifup and wpasupplicant). That said, nothing prevents the creation of a decent command-line interface. There's cnetworkmanager, which wasn't working the last time I checked (API incompatibility with the Debian packages, might have been fixed by now). The DBus API is pretty straightforward, I use a bunch of scripts to create and delete wireless connections. FWIW, nmcli is supposed to be the official NM CLI and it superseded cnetworkmanager: http://repo.or.cz/w/cnetworkmanager.git/commitdiff/e2c001152478bd12df8aca8627cde298ad552e12 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NetworkManagerCmdline Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca pgpTZImGcziWh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Dne 3.4.2011 18:08, Fernando Lemos napsal(a): * It doesn't have a good command-line interface It does have CLI interface. Those commands are bundled directly in NetworkManager: nm-cli nm-tool nm-online I'm not sure if this qualify as good command-line interface :) Miroslav Suchy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dbdd896.3030...@suchy.cz
Re: network-manager as default? No!
2011/5/1 Miroslav Suchý miros...@suchy.cz: Dne 3.4.2011 18:08, Fernando Lemos napsal(a): * It doesn't have a good command-line interface It does have CLI interface. Those commands are bundled directly in NetworkManager: nm-cli nm-tool nm-online I'm not sure if this qualify as good command-line interface :) Those tools can't create or delete connections, which is kind of important, so no. ;-) Of course you can always create the system connections with a text editor, it's nothing too complex but the format isn't documented AFAICT, probably because you are not supposed to create them manually. That said, nothing prevents the creation of a decent command-line interface. There's cnetworkmanager, which wasn't working the last time I checked (API incompatibility with the Debian packages, might have been fixed by now). The DBus API is pretty straightforward, I use a bunch of scripts to create and delete wireless connections. Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/banlktimbymnwhtge1ko3xy0m86thgg_...@mail.gmail.com
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Fernando Lemos fernando...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Felipe Sateler fsate...@debian.org wrote: Preparing to replace network-manager 0.8.3.999-1 (using .../network- manager_0.8.3.999-1_amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement network-manager ... Setting up network-manager (0.8.3.999-1) ... Reloading system message bus config...done. Stopping network connection manager: NetworkManager. ps, wifi connection gone Starting network connection manager: NetworkManager. Processing triggers for man-db ... As it was said before (*multiple* times, unfortunately), that's expected. For the record: *I* don't expect it, since this behaviour is completely unnecessary and only a result of bad design. Leaving wpa_supplicant running on stop and re-interfacing with it on start would be simple to do if you wanted to fix this bug. But it's of course always much easier to claim that it's not a bug at all. Pigs can fly. The moon is made of green cheese. etc. Your *wired* connection won't go down... Why not? That seems very inconsistent. How do I know which interfaces I should expect to go down? Any interface without a wire? Can I make the wlan interface stay up if I use a longer antenna cable? Why not? Only a Network Manager developer can possibly know what to expect of Network Manager... Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxjitj3r@nemi.mork.no
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 07:40:33PM +0200, Stephan Seitz wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 03:23:32PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: NM may be good for laptops, so put it in the laptop task and leave the rest alone in the default installation. And keep the installer unable to do things as widespread as WPA? And keep it unable to generate a proper configuration for laptops? How many systems are needing WLAN for installation? Servers don’t have WLAN, I never have seen a Desktop with WLAN (neither in companies nor private PCs). I've used a wifi USB NIC in a desktop for years. My circa-2006 desktop machine had it built-in. I've also fallen back to it on machines where I normally use wired, when we've had network switch problems (and our wifi is routed via different switches). Granted, where I have the chance, I will use wired for a static machine. However I've only just renovated my study and ran some Ethernet: for the 18 months before that I relied on wifi. One or two fresh installations in that time required moving the machine, or running temporary cabling. All Mac desktops currently on sale (iMac, Mac Mini, Mac Pro) feature built-in wifi adaptors and we've had to rely on it for one or two of the machines we look after at work when we moved things around and lacked enough cabling for them all. Some friends of mine use it exclusively rather than run cable around their houses. There are other classes of device where it can be essential (some SOHO NAS devices, internet tablets and F/OSS capable mobile phones), although many of those require a custom installation method anyway. -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110420210752.ga11...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Hello, On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:47:18 +0200 Stig Sandbeck Mathisen s...@debian.org wrote: My major gripe with ifupdown is the lack of CIDR in address, but I can live with that. :) ifupdown 0.7 does support CIDR. -- WBR, Andrew signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Martin Wuertele m...@debian.org writes: iface ethX inet static address x.x.x.x netmask x.x.x.x gateway x.x.x.x up ip rule add downip rule del This means that I need to bring the interface down to change routing? Currently I have post-up /etc/init.d/routing restart so that I can manually invoke /etc/init.d/routing restart also without having to bring the interfaces down. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/84oc44skfn@sauna.l.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 03:32:18PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: This was stated in the original proposal: ifupdown is not event-based and does not integrate correctly with modern boot systems. So what? ifupdown is working on most setups without problems with VLANs bonds, or bridges out of the box without unnecessary dependencies and daemons. Beside I am not interested in having my network reconfigured by a stupid daemon finding some „events”. I don’t even use event base boot systems (still using file-rc), because I don’t like the idea. Sticking to this unmaintained piece of software with a design for systems from the 80s only leads to an increasing amount of complexity to This design has not changed much. Even today most systems still have the same configuration as they had for the last ten years. One IP address, one gateway and some DNS servers. The configuration for ifupdown has become easier in the last years as well. In the beginning you had to script your VLAN or bond magic yourself, now there already exists hooks. I certainly don’t mind having N-M in the archives. If someone wish to install it, he should be able to. But I don’t want N-M as part of the base installation and handling my network without me choosing to do so. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 03:23:32PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: NM may be good for laptops, so put it in the laptop task and leave the rest alone in the default installation. And keep the installer unable to do things as widespread as WPA? And keep it unable to generate a proper configuration for laptops? How many systems are needing WLAN for installation? Servers don’t have WLAN, I never have seen a Desktop with WLAN (neither in companies nor private PCs). I only have WLAN in laptops. And since I only have Intel WiFi, d-i never was able to use it because I need non-free firmware (no fault of d-i, mind you, non-free is non-free, which is a part why I don’t like WLAN). But if you think that is so important, put N-M in d-i and activate it if the user wants to use WLAN for installation. But don’t install it if the user doesn’t explicitly ask for it. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 09:47:54PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote: protocols. I would have preferred something like some routers do: iface eth0 address .. ipv6address .. I think this is a very good idea, because you don’t have to duplicate bridge configurations. If the configuration looked like this I could live with the fact not being able to (de)activate one part of a dual stack interface. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Le jeudi 14 avril 2011 à 08:00 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit : I think it is wrong, based on the fact expressed in these threads that NetworkManager can, by default during upgrade, bring down the network connection. This argument has been rehashed again and again, without ever confronting it to a reality check. Since this bug has been fixed several months ago, can we move on now? -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1302848573.3298.97.camel@pi0307572
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Le mercredi 13 avril 2011 à 11:39 +0200, Stephan Seitz a écrit : My first (and last) contact with NM was not a good one. This is another misconception about Network-Manager: since version 0.6 (the first one with which people have been in contact to) was very badly designed, the current version must be too. Since it was completely redesigned, almost from scratch, this doesn’t apply for 0.8. Its system daemon is able to manage connections without anyone logged on, and with a number of features that makes ifupdown look like a baby toy. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1302848823.3298.101.camel@pi0307572
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Maybe if there was a version number greater than 0.8 people might be more willing to try network manager again. A rewrite seems like a good reason to have version 1.0 or maybe 2.0. The idea of basing version numbers on technical issues only was given up a long time ago. -- My bloghttp://etbe.coker.com.au Sent from an Xperia X10 Android phone -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/6a675717-9ac8-47d2-9c2e-bc1b37af4...@email.android.com
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On pe, 2011-04-15 at 08:27 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le mercredi 13 avril 2011 à 11:39 +0200, Stephan Seitz a écrit : My first (and last) contact with NM was not a good one. This is another misconception about Network-Manager: since version 0.6 (the first one with which people have been in contact to) was very badly designed, the current version must be too. Back in, oh, 1991, a friend of mine showed me this thing he'd written. It was a little program that had two threads, one printing As and the other printing Bs. The screen was full of sequences of As and Bs and he was so very proud of it. A few weeks later, he showed me a new version of his program. It still had two threads, one which would read from the keyboard and write to the serial port, and the other reading from the serial port and writing to the screen. Even had some terminal emulation. He spent a lot of time reading Usenet with it, dialling in to the university modem pool. Pretty impressive, for an As-and-Bs program. Then he kept hacking at it, and the program grew and became more complicated. It got the ability to do real processes, instead of just two threads. Also, he got it to run different things in each process, loading the code for them from disk. As-and-Bs had grown into a tiny litte operating system. He called it Freax. It could easily have been considered a joke. It did not even have virtual memory, never mind core dumps, shared libraries, graphics support, or networking. And it only ran on i386, not on real computers like the M68k or SPARC. You pretty much had to compile and port everything yourself. It was really just a toy, suitable only for a very small group of people. Anyone who wanted something that actually worked chose something else. For years, people would say things like oh that thing, I tried it once, but it didn't work on my hardware, it's just a toy. When he uploaded it to an ftp server the ftpmaster didn't like the name, and renamed it. You may have heard the new name. It's now called Linux. Software can get better. Sometimes it's even possible to successfully go from something built for a very narrow use case (print As and Bs on the screen) to something that's generally usable for an entirely different purpose (the world's most versatile operating system kernel). If you've tried version 1, that does not mean version 2 is anything like it. -- Blog/wiki/website hosting with ikiwiki (free for free software): http://www.branchable.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1302851224.2921.64.ca...@havelock.liw.fi
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On 04/13/2011 08:53 PM, Jon Dowland wrote: Or in other words, if a server user does an attended install via d-i, doesn't trigger expert mode and accepts the defaults for most questions, is it wrong if they end up with NetworkManager? Yes. That is what we have things like the 'Desktop' task for. -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4da7f726.1060...@bzed.de
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 08:27:03AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Since it was completely redesigned, almost from scratch, this doesn’t apply for 0.8. Its system daemon is able to manage connections without anyone logged on, and with a number of features that makes ifupdown look like a baby toy. Maybe, but *I* had never a need for it. I can do my VLAN and bridge configuration with ifupdown. Most PCs of mine don’t have WLAN cards, so I don’t need NM with running wpasupplicant. And those PCs have a static network configuration. NM may be good for laptops, so put it in the laptop task and leave the rest alone in the default installation. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 05:06:00PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote: Maybe if there was a version number greater than 0.8 people might be more willing to try network manager again. A rewrite seems like a good reason to have version 1.0 or maybe 2.0. I appreciate your point, but this is unfortunately not common enough in practice and not a sane reason to discount a piece of software. Or we wouldn't be running GRUB 2 version 1.98. -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110415085744.gb17...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 08:22:53AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le jeudi 14 avril 2011 à 08:00 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit : I think it is wrong, based on the fact expressed in these threads that NetworkManager can, by default during upgrade, bring down the network connection. This argument has been rehashed again and again, without ever confronting it to a reality check. Since this bug has been fixed several months ago, can we move on now? For the record, this was (at least) bugs #432322 and #439917, and I'm extremely pleased that the issues have been resolved. Well done and thank you to all involved. Could those thread participants who have gripes from their last NM experience many years ago please confirm that their gripes still apply before continuing with the discussion? -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110415090340.gc17...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:53:02 +0100, Jon Dowland j...@debian.org wrote: ... Having said all of the above, and the thread being where it is now, I have to admit I can't remember what the value proposition was in the first place. Time to re-read... So, you just failed to provide any justification for a change to the status quo, while blathering on about how people who install servers ought to be able to reconfigure stuff - is that right? Next! Anyone? Hello, is this thing on? *tap* *tap* ... addressing one of your earlier questions: Or in other words, if a server user does an attended install via d-i, doesn't trigger expert mode and accepts the defaults for most questions, is it wrong if they end up with NetworkManager? Yes. Unless and until someone explains why they would be happy about that. If we end up with the support channels full of people being told Well, didn't you know, if you want it to keep on working you need to strip out N-M and just hardwire your IP address in /etc/network/interfaces then we've done a disservice to each and every one of those users. Even for folks like myself, who are perfectly capable of scripting an install, I occasionally do server installs for friends simply because they have a spare machine, and I have a USB stick on my keyring with d-i on it. I don't really want to have to remember all the tweaks that I normally script. I don't see why I should have to unless there is some reason that the resulting setup is going to be better for a larger proportion of installs taking into account whatever the tasks selected , and other debconf answers, imply about the target machine. So, while my personal preference is wicd, I'm completely relaxed about the Desktop task installing N-M, just as I am that it installs Gnome rather than my choice of xmonad (clearly, xmonad would be an insane choice of default desktop for Debian). On the other hand, nobody from the Isn't N-M great camp seems willing to explain why I'd want it in preference to ifupdown on a server, particularly a co-lo remotely admined server. In all other aspects, Debian takes the approach that if code is not needed on a machine, we don't install it -- we don't do the RedHat thing of piling on apache, but disabling it, we simply don't install it. For a machine with a static IP address, it seems pretty obvious that you want to set that address at boot time and then leave it alone regardless of what else might happen. Perhaps the shiny new version of N-M has a mode where it realises its work is done and quits, but I have a suspicion that it does not do that. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/ |-| HANDS.COM Ltd.http://www.uk.debian.org/ |(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLAND pgpVVeEIeqbUB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Hi, On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:03:40AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: For the record, this was (at least) bugs #432322 and #439917, and I'm extremely pleased that the issues have been resolved. Well done and thank you to all involved. AIUI they weren't resolved, but the scope of the problem was significantly minimized, which is important to note. I.e. in testing/unstable wired ethernet connections are no longer bounced during upgrade/removal. (again AIUI) In the remaining use cases network connections *are* bounced, but in the postinst rather than preinst/postinst, which lowers the chance of Bad Things happening to your network-based upgrades. And AFAIK such connections are still torn down during package removal. Could those thread participants who have gripes from their last NM experience many years ago please confirm that their gripes still apply before continuing with the discussion? (I'll assume that the slightly-less-than-polite[1] nature of this request is directed at others, but will field the question anyway) I use NM on a daily basis, and am somewhere between generally and very happy with the experience in the scope that I use it. I don't have anecdotal complaints as much as I see some potentially big problems with having NM be a _default_for_all_installs_. Plus, I haven't seen (even after asking) what the benefit is that outweighs these problems: * n-m does not support the same level of variety in network configurations, which is a regression for some subset of server environments. * any bouncing of network connections during package install/upgrade/removal is still a regression/risk even if limited in scope. * glib isn't the best library on top of which to build such a critical system level service[2] * it would result in a size/complexity growth to the standard installation. * it would require changes in long-standing practices if ifup, ifdown, and /e/n/i are no longer the preferred way to handle network configuration[3]. * requiring dbus, last I checked, would increase the likelihood of upgrades requiring manual intervention and/or reboot[4]. Allowing for but you can always uninstall this and install ifupdown is fine[5], except, why should the admin have to do so in the first place, as opposed to if you really want network-manager on your server you can install it? I'm not trying to be knee-jerk obstructionist[6] here. If we decide that we have good reasons to have a stateful network configuration daemon in every install by default, so be it, it's not my call anyway. But the implementation of *this* stateful network configuration daemon leaves a bit to be desired and I'm still waiting on what the rationale is for *why* we want to have it in the first place, hence my voicing of concerns. BR Sean [1] Gripe isn't really a constructive way to describe what could be valid and potentially significant issues. [2] the glib allocation behavior being one example. [3] this also would affect *packages* using ifup/etc or the /e/n/if-*.d/* hooks [4] that'd be #495257 which is a whole other can of worms, and I assume most admins would rather we keep servers out of that when possible. [5] though if you happen to be installing debian on a remote device that has a connection other than wired-ethernet, you suddenly have problems getting rid of NM without locking yourself out. [6] nor a get off my lawn u damn kids, learn to RTFM type either. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110415111923.ga28...@cobija.connexer.com
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes: Since it was completely redesigned, almost from scratch, this doesn’t apply for 0.8. Its system daemon is able to manage connections without anyone logged on, and with a number of features that makes ifupdown look like a baby toy. So Network-Manager has finally gained basic features like the ability to set a lower than default MTU? How about bridging? VLANs? Unnumbered interfaces? DHCPv6-PD? Disabling IPv6 SLAAC on a specific interface? Multiple uplinks? Multiple routing tables? Creating tap interfaces connected to virtual swiches? Different types of tunnels? Sharing an ethernet interface between PPPoE and IP? The list of features *not* supported by Network Manager is so long that I really don't understand how you can start a feature based discussion. Surely there must be some other attraction to Network Manager than it's network configuration features? They are extremely limited I'm afraid. I've always believed that peoply chose NM for simplicity. And I can understand that. It's simple because it doesn't support anything complex, including common VPN setups. Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87pqonvi4d@nemi.mork.no
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:03:40AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 08:22:53AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: This argument has been rehashed again and again, without ever confronting it to a reality check. Since this bug has been fixed several months ago, can we move on now? For the record, this was (at least) bugs #432322 and #439917, and I'm extremely pleased that the issues have been resolved. Well done and thank you to all involved. Could those thread participants who have gripes from their last NM experience many years ago please confirm that their gripes still apply before continuing with the discussion? What is the newest version of NM that is semi-sane then? I've heard a long diatribe from my brother (an admin at a medium-sized ISP, so not exactly a clueless person) just last weekend about NM failing hard on a fresh squeeze install. Which was met with horror stories from a friend about it on new Ubuntu laptops, all the problems instantly went away the moment NM was purged. I did not listen closely, and just nodded. This might be circumstantial evidence, but it's not exactly encouraging enough to give NM a chance. And yet I just tried on a desktop with a single wired network card and a virtualbox install. It immediately killed IPv6 connectivity and the vboxnet interface. I'm very sorry but I'm not going to investigate any closer. Let's see what it is supposed to be able to do: * simple DHCP setups * simple wireless setups The former works just fine without network-manager, even without any manual configuration at all. The latter has alternatives that don't mess with non-wlan interfaces. Thus, what exactly are you trying to fix by installing network-manager by default? -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110415121332.gb20...@angband.pl
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes:
So Network-Manager has finally gained basic features like the ability to
set a lower than default MTU?
How about bridging? VLANs? Unnumbered interfaces? DHCPv6-PD?
Disabling IPv6 SLAAC on a specific interface? Multiple uplinks?
Multiple routing tables? Creating tap interfaces connected to virtual
swiches? Different types of tunnels? Sharing an ethernet interface
between PPPoE and IP?
I'd be interested in seeing real-life ifupdown configurations that
handle these.
When I needed multiple routing tables I couldn't find any specific
ifupdown support. I just wrote my own custom /etc/init.d/routing that
first removes all routing rules with something as ugly as
ip rule show | grep -Ev '^(0|32766|32767):|iif lo' \
| while read PRIO NATRULE; do
ip rule del prio ${PRIO%%:*} $( echo $NATRULE | sed 's|all|0/0|' )
done
and then calls ip rule and ip route to setup the desired routing
configuration.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/84lizbemjf@sauna.l.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
* Timo Juhani Lindfors timo.lindf...@iki.fi [2011-04-15 14:18]:
ip rule show | grep -Ev '^(0|32766|32767):|iif lo' \
| while read PRIO NATRULE; do
ip rule del prio ${PRIO%%:*} $( echo $NATRULE | sed 's|all|0/0|' )
done
iface ethX inet static
address x.x.x.x
netmask x.x.x.x
gateway x.x.x.x
up ip rule add
downip rule del
yours
Martin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110415124031.gt16...@anguilla.debian.or.at
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Martin Wuertele m...@debian.org writes:
* Timo Juhani Lindfors timo.lindf...@iki.fi [2011-04-15 14:18]:
ip rule show | grep -Ev '^(0|32766|32767):|iif lo' \
| while read PRIO NATRULE; do
ip rule del prio ${PRIO%%:*} $( echo $NATRULE | sed 's|all|0/0|' )
done
iface ethX inet static
address x.x.x.x
netmask x.x.x.x
gateway x.x.x.x
up ip rule add
downip rule del
This is basically what I do, too.
The power of the pre-up/up/down/post-down scripting is tremendous.
Bjørn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ipufvfl7@nemi.mork.no
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Hi, On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 02:01:06PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote: Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes: Since it was completely redesigned, almost from scratch, this doesn’t apply for 0.8. Its system daemon is able to manage connections without anyone logged on, and with a number of features that makes ifupdown look like a baby toy. So Network-Manager has finally gained basic features like the ability to set a lower than default MTU? AFAICT n-m had support for setting a lower MTU since 2008. And with basic network features do you mean things like - custom routes per interface - multiple ip adresses per interface - WLAN configuration - 802.11x - overriding default nameservers per connection - overriding default search domain per connection - netmasks in CIDR notation and all of that - in a central place with a consistent interface - without reliance on external commands (such as the ip command or shell scripts) for basic stuff - without crude hacks (e.g. defining additional interfaces just to bring up another ip) Do you? How about bridging? VLANs? Unnumbered interfaces? DHCPv6-PD? Disabling IPv6 SLAAC on a specific interface? Multiple uplinks? Multiple routing tables? Creating tap interfaces connected to virtual swiches? Different types of tunnels? Sharing an ethernet interface between PPPoE and IP? I guess n-m fails in those scenarios. At least for bridging I know it. Now the question is, weither this is relevant for *default* installs or not. Now the above stated features are not features used by every Debian user. They are specific for certain use-cases. They can still be realised. Either with - writing an appropriate NM plugin - writing a shell script and dropping it in the network-manager dispatcher directory (basically similar ifupdowns if*.d directories) - installing and using ifupdown together with network-manager or alone- Even if n-m would be the default on new installations. Note, that I'm not advocating for or against n-m as the default in Debian. I don't even have a strong opinion about this (as long as I'm still able to install ifupdown, if my use-case is not handled by n-m). But it would help, if people would actually focus on the problem to be solved instead of the whole worlds problems. What I'd personally like is a well-integrated comprehensive network configuration solution with a sane design. Able to manage systemwide and relocating connections. Simple and complex connections. With a configuration file backend *and* a GUI. Maybe with a cli tool as well. I guess thats what most people want, even if their *need* is a different one. The list of features *not* supported by Network Manager is so long that Most ifupdown features are not native. Its basically a framework which allows *other* tools to provide all the features you named. I've always believed that peoply chose NM for simplicity. And I can understand that. It's simple because it doesn't support anything complex, including common VPN setups. ifupdown does not support any VPN setup at all. how does that fit in your argumentation? Best Regards, Patrick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110415130447.GA14482@debian
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Stephan Seitz wrote: NM may be good for laptops, so put it in the laptop task and leave the rest alone in the default installation. And keep the installer unable to do things as widespread as WPA? And keep it unable to generate a proper configuration for laptops? No thanks. -- Joss -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/fd794e2f3be2441b39bbf08a85156ee0.squir...@malsain.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Patrick Schoenfeld schoenf...@debian.org wrote: I've always believed that peoply chose NM for simplicity. And I can understand that. It's simple because it doesn't support anything complex, including common VPN setups. ifupdown does not support any VPN setup at all. how does that fit in your argumentation? Btw, not sure this hasn't been mentioned before but: http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/network-manager-openvpn http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/network-manager-vpnc But nevermind, this thread is not about considering technical merits or sane defaults, it's all about letting the world know about your preferences, right? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTikdSmTCwS9yFQmG36CC5khMAK=q...@mail.gmail.com
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Philip Hands wrote: On the other hand, nobody from the Isn't N-M great camp seems willing to explain why I'd want it in preference to ifupdown on a server, particularly a co-lo remotely admined server. This was stated in the original proposal: ifupdown is not event-based and does not integrate correctly with modern boot systems. Sticking to this unmaintained piece of software with a design for systems from the 80s only leads to an increasing amount of complexity to handle network setups. How do you start up network interfaces that depend on each other, because e.g. they are stacked on each other? How do you start services that depend on given network interfaces to be up? With ifupdown, you build hacks on top of other hacks, and you wait for the next failure. For a machine with a static IP address, it seems pretty obvious that you want to set that address at boot time and then leave it alone regardless of what else might happen. For a machine with an IP address assigned by DHCP, which is a very common setup even on servers, you want to detect network disconnections and re-launch dhclient at reconnection. Even for things as simple as that, ifupdown fails to do the job. -- Joss -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/41c7411e1d106f4af704c68f673909da.squir...@malsain.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote: Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no writes: How about bridging? VLANs? Unnumbered interfaces? DHCPv6-PD? Disabling IPv6 SLAAC on a specific interface? Multiple uplinks? Multiple routing tables? Creating tap interfaces connected to virtual swiches? Different types of tunnels? Sharing an ethernet interface between PPPoE and IP? I'd be interested in seeing real-life ifupdown configurations that handle these. Of course ifupdown doesnt handle these. They are usually handled by scripts outside of ifupdown. And you can do the same with NM, although the interface is different (which, I agree, doesnt help migrating things). -- Joss -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/979b6b8d597c79226be375dd13ecbb96.squir...@malsain.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Björn Mork wrote: Martin Wuertele m...@debian.org writes: up ip rule add downip rule del The power of the pre-up/up/down/post-down scripting is tremendous. So is that of NM dispatcher scripts. What is your gripe, again? -- Joss -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/0a7900980c8168f8ce4e815d8522d86d.squir...@malsain.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Patrick Schoenfeld schoenf...@debian.org writes: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 02:01:06PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote: Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes: Since it was completely redesigned, almost from scratch, this doesn’t apply for 0.8. Its system daemon is able to manage connections without anyone logged on, and with a number of features that makes ifupdown look like a baby toy. So Network-Manager has finally gained basic features like the ability to set a lower than default MTU? AFAICT n-m had support for setting a lower MTU since 2008. Great. Didn't know that. Couldn't find it documented anywhere, but that's probably because Network Manager in general is completely undocumented. And with basic network features do you mean things like - custom routes per interface Sure, just add up ip route 2001:db8:42::/48 foo dev $IFACE to the interface config - multiple ip adresses per interface Sure, just add up ip addr add 2001:db8:13::1/64 dev $IFACE to the interface config - WLAN configuration Sure, just add wpa-roam /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf to the interface config - 802.11x Don't to that, but the wpa_supplicant scripts should support it AFAIK. - overriding default nameservers per connection That's actually a feature I try to avoid, as I rarely (if ever?) use a computer with a single interface. So which interface defines the connection? But it can of course be done. The main problem is knowing which servers to configure, based on which protocol and which interface, and not doing the actual /etc/resolv.conf replacement. - overriding default search domain per connection Now, that's a feature I find extremely dangerous. So you connect to host foo, which turns out to be either foo.bar or foo.baz depending on which interface is currently up? Weird. Why would anyone want that? Yes, it can of course be done. - netmasks in CIDR notation Which would be nice, but staying backwards compatible is more important. and all of that - in a central place with a consistent interface Yes: /etc/network/interfaces - without reliance on external commands (such as the ip command or shell scripts) for basic stuff Which is bad because of what? Using the ip command or shell scripts is an important feature to me. I don't want grep, cp, ls etc unified to a single file handling program either. I prefer the UNIX way of simple utilities doing *one* thing and doing that well. - without crude hacks (e.g. defining additional interfaces just to bring up another ip) I assume you are talking about alias interfaces? Well, that's a kernel feature from way back and has nothing to do with ifupdown, except that it supports them. Which Network Manager doesn't, if I read the BTS correct. But I rarely use them for additional addresses, no. I use up ip addr add instead. The list of features *not* supported by Network Manager is so long that Most ifupdown features are not native. Its basically a framework which allows *other* tools to provide all the features you named. Yes, that's why it works. It doesn't *prevent* you from doing what you want. I've always believed that peoply chose NM for simplicity. And I can understand that. It's simple because it doesn't support anything complex, including common VPN setups. ifupdown does not support any VPN setup at all. how does that fit in your argumentation? It doesn't? Weird. Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ei53vcya@nemi.mork.no
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Björn Mork wrote: - without reliance on external commands (such as the ip command or shell scripts) for basic stuff Which is bad because of what? Using the ip command or shell scripts is an important feature to me. I don't want grep, cp, ls etc unified to a single file handling program either. I prefer the UNIX way of simple utilities doing *one* thing and doing that well. I dont think we agree on the doing that well statement. -- Joss -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/9010ebfcd54c02b8c98239773ee1b356.squir...@malsain.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes: Björn Mork wrote: Martin Wuertele m...@debian.org writes: up ip rule add downip rule del The power of the pre-up/up/down/post-down scripting is tremendous. So is that of NM dispatcher scripts. And this is documented where. What is your gripe, again? 1) That Network Manager brings down interfaces without me explicitly asking for that (on stop, suspend, or upgrade unless you happen to hit the exception made to ignore a RC bug). 2) That you cannot configure any complex networking using Network Manager. And by complex here, I mean something like my laptop configuration. Yes, I do both bridging and vlans on my laptop. It makes it much easier to handle virtual guests. BTW, can Network Manager do IPv4 only on a network where IPv6 RAs are present? I ask because I don't know, not to be difficult. I'd really appreciate a HOWTO for that... Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87aafrvbz1@nemi.mork.no
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Timo Juhani Lindfors timo.lindf...@iki.fi writes: I'd be interested in seeing real-life ifupdown configurations that handle these. Here's an example from one of my servers that handles _some_ of them. (Addresses rewritten to rfc3330 space, and no explicit IPv6 config): * Two bonded ethernet interfaces for redundant layer two networking to distinct switches. (miimon vs arp_ip_target is another discussion). * Interfaces are added to bonding device when discovered. * Two extra VLAN interfaces. , | auto eth0 eth1 bond0 vlan101 vlan102 | | iface eth0 inet manual | bond-master bond0 | bond-primary eth0 eth1 | | iface eth1 inet manual | bond-master bond0 | bond-primary eth0 eth1 | | iface bond0 inet static | bond_slaves none | bond_mode active-backup | bond_miimon 100 | address 192.0.2.2 | netmask 255.255.255.248 | gateway 192.0.2.1 | | iface vlan101 inet static | vlan-raw-device bond0 | address 192.0.2.162 | netmask 255.255.255.248 | | iface vlan102 inet static | vlan-raw-device bond0 | address 192.0.2.170 | netmask 255.255.255.248 ` My major gripe with ifupdown is the lack of CIDR in address, but I can live with that. :) -- Stig Sandbeck Mathisen ooo, shiny! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sjtjmxsp@mavis.fnord.no
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Josselin Mouette wrote: For a machine with an IP address assigned by DHCP, which is a very common setup even on servers, ... I have to ask: What sort of overall network setup would you be using, where server IP addresses are assigned by DHCP? I'm having trouble imagining any remotely common setup where this might be done. -kgd, no particular stake in the N-M vs ifupdown debate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4da8565e.8070...@vianet.ca
Re: network-manager as default? No!
* Fernando Lemos fernando...@gmail.com [110415 15:26]: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Patrick Schoenfeld schoenf...@debian.org wrote: I've always believed that peoply chose NM for simplicity. And I can understand that. It's simple because it doesn't support anything complex, including common VPN setups. ifupdown does not support any VPN setup at all. how does that fit in your argumentation? Btw, not sure this hasn't been mentioned before but: http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/network-manager-openvpn http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/network-manager-vpnc Last I looked at n-m-vpnc it had many show-stoppers. It was not able to cope with some routing strangenesses related to the nameservers needed at the different stages of creating the connection, I was not able to easily globally set the group password and it did not offer to ask for the user name together with the password. With wicd one can simply configure some script to execute and thus everything can be made work easily. Fighting old reports of people having problems with new anectodes of everything working out of the box will not convice people. You have to show that the actual problems are solved, not only the symptoms. But nevermind, this thread is not about considering technical merits or sane defaults, it's all about letting the world know about your preferences, right? Why not discuss topics instead of insulting people? Thanks in advance. Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110415145245.ga28...@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de
Re: network-manager as default? No!
]] Kris Deugau | Josselin Mouette wrote: | For a machine with an IP address assigned by DHCP, which is a very common | setup even on servers, | | ... I have to ask: What sort of overall network setup would you be | using, where server IP addresses are assigned by DHCP? Any kind of cloud-like setup, for instance. Heck, I use DHCP for normal servers too, since it means I can keep network configuration centralised. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/877hav5tw2@qurzaw.varnish-software.com
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:03:40 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 08:22:53AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le jeudi 14 avril 2011 à 08:00 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit : I think it is wrong, based on the fact expressed in these threads that NetworkManager can, by default during upgrade, bring down the network connection. This argument has been rehashed again and again, without ever confronting it to a reality check. Since this bug has been fixed several months ago, can we move on now? For the record, this was (at least) bugs #432322 and #439917, and I'm extremely pleased that the issues have been resolved. Well done and thank you to all involved. And 415196. Could those thread participants who have gripes from their last NM experience many years ago please confirm that their gripes still apply before continuing with the discussion? felipe@pcfelipe:supercollider% apt-cache policy network-manager network-manager: Installed: 0.8.3.999-1 Candidate: 0.8.3.999-1 Version table: 0.8.998-1 0 1 http://ftp.br.debian.org/debian/ experimental/main amd64 Packages *** 0.8.3.999-1 0 500 http://ftp.br.debian.org/debian/ sid/main amd64 Packages 500 http://ftp.br.debian.org/debian/ testing/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status felipe@pcfelipe:supercollider% sudo aptitude reinstall network-manager The following packages will be REINSTALLED: network-manager 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 216 not upgraded. Need to get 0 B/1,102 kB of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used. Reading package fields... Done Reading package status... Done Retrieving bug reports... Done Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done (Reading database ... 219815 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to replace network-manager 0.8.3.999-1 (using .../network- manager_0.8.3.999-1_amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement network-manager ... Setting up network-manager (0.8.3.999-1) ... Reloading system message bus config...done. Stopping network connection manager: NetworkManager. ps, wifi connection gone Starting network connection manager: NetworkManager. Processing triggers for man-db ... Should I file yet another bug for the same thing? This bug (and variations thereof) have been closed when 1. Network downtime was minimized (by restarting in postinst instead of stop in prerm and start in postinst), not eliminated. 2. NM was taught not to bring down DHCP and static connections. Apparently not bringing down the interface and then picking it up on start is not easy to do. There is still a bug, though. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ioaej7$ak$1...@dough.gmane.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Felipe Sateler fsate...@debian.org wrote: Could those thread participants who have gripes from their last NM experience many years ago please confirm that their gripes still apply before continuing with the discussion? felipe@pcfelipe:supercollider% apt-cache policy network-manager network-manager: Installed: 0.8.3.999-1 Candidate: 0.8.3.999-1 Version table: 0.8.998-1 0 1 http://ftp.br.debian.org/debian/ experimental/main amd64 Packages *** 0.8.3.999-1 0 500 http://ftp.br.debian.org/debian/ sid/main amd64 Packages 500 http://ftp.br.debian.org/debian/ testing/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status felipe@pcfelipe:supercollider% sudo aptitude reinstall network-manager The following packages will be REINSTALLED: network-manager 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 216 not upgraded. Need to get 0 B/1,102 kB of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used. Reading package fields... Done Reading package status... Done Retrieving bug reports... Done Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done (Reading database ... 219815 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to replace network-manager 0.8.3.999-1 (using .../network- manager_0.8.3.999-1_amd64.deb) ... Unpacking replacement network-manager ... Setting up network-manager (0.8.3.999-1) ... Reloading system message bus config...done. Stopping network connection manager: NetworkManager. ps, wifi connection gone Starting network connection manager: NetworkManager. Processing triggers for man-db ... As it was said before (*multiple* times, unfortunately), that's expected. Your *wired* connection won't go down... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTi=ASmGeu+jL0LmULrnrLmpi=cr...@mail.gmail.com
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On 04/04/2011 12:56 PM, Jon Dowland wrote: On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management solution to handle all of these? Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4da56479.60...@bzed.de
only servers pfff (Was: Re: network-manager as default? No!)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2011-04-13 10:53, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. The universal OS is only running on servers. Check. - -- brother http://sis.bthstudent.se -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJNpWUuAAoJEJbdSEaj0jV7Fc4H/i0dTHQTnQH93lFMbrw1Tzi2 RKAwVHoh04tmzb0+td/TVNHOe/D9AG7KYcOPHC1Wn9oUewSI2/jF9CtTV8axPi1N 6r1k1C951rGMUF1AVG9MWkiGs9pqEgqZ124hv1XnlXXetg5hLw3vqGsE7pA3DPsk wGcJDjx0HNyN8hW4pJ+aDojNxy75eDtahX3bzi/dBPe6cCqi92diRtjWrEvy0kON sBflPRmz6drCLFAXqHaw8uX7QqH+31g/EIMRVUMgMS7N9K24qy3bTIEDBZtiCwxg yMwYTZauvq9Q462rfk770/6k0wuFwX9SiQvFl1CkO593j3WJLJ3zvy4Ycv1yZoY= =qPaT -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4da5652e.90...@bsnet.se
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 11:56:23AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management solution to handle all of these? If it could be easily substituted for another solution that was better suited to tasks which a majority of users will not use, then surely that is fine. (although I'd like to get NM and bridging working more nicely personally, I consider this more of a feature bug than an RC one) Except that it'd also be a regression from what's possible on current default server installs, since it already works. And any regression should be countered by strong motivation for why it's important to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and hopefully some plans for going and finding the baby later on. Did i miss the part where somebody explained what the user benefit of having network-manager on a server was? (apart from then it's the same as your desktop[1], anyway). sean [1] although it isn't, unless you're installing gnome on your server, but then you're installing a desktop not a server, and you'd get it by default anyway, and then what's the point? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110413091127.ga19...@cobija.connexer.com
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:11:27AM +0200, sean finney wrote: Did i miss the part where somebody explained what the user benefit of having network-manager on a server was? (apart from then it's the same as your desktop[1], anyway). I don’t even know why NM should be on a normal desktop. My first (and last) contact with NM was not a good one. I was doing a remote upgrade of a desktop and suddenly the system was unreachable. After a reboot it worked, but shortly the system was unreachable again. Then I noticed that the default gateway was missing. The desktop didn’t have a configured eth0, but two configured vlan interfaces. NM thought, hey let’s configure eth0, and tried to configure eth0 via DHCP and deleted the default gateway. Since then, the first thing I do is to disable this crap. Besides I don’t have any desktop with WLAN interface. So ifupdown is more than enough to configure the network. Some people say that NM is good with WLAN. Maybe. Since I don’t touch NM again, I always used ifupdown and wpasupplicant with success. But I rarely use WLAN. If NM is really good with WLAN it should only be part of the laptop task and never touch cable networks. The only thing that I miss from ifupdown (and I configured bonds, bridges and vlans) is a good IPv6 support. I can’t separately activate or deactivate IPv4 or IPv6 parts of an interface. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: only servers pfff (Was: Re: network-manager as default? No!)
On 04/13/2011 10:56 AM, Martin Bagge / brother wrote: On 2011-04-13 10:53, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. The universal OS is only running on servers. Check. Get your facts straight. Targeted to support servers properly does not mean only on servers. -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprints: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4da5739c.2020...@bzed.de
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:53:13 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: On 04/04/2011 12:56 PM, Jon Dowland wrote: On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management solution to handle all of these? Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. Surely a person managing a server can do aptitude install ifupdown network-manager-? -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/io418e$1pq$1...@dough.gmane.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:26:06AM +, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:53:13 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. Surely a person managing a server can do aptitude install ifupdown network-manager-? No, unless you are physically at the keyboard at the time. -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On 13/04/2011 10:53, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: On 04/04/2011 12:56 PM, Jon Dowland wrote: On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management solution to handle all of these? Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. I sincerely hope that you're joking… At least, the rest of the project doesn't share this view. It's like saying that Desktop users are second class citizens, which is plain wrong! Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4da58c33.8060...@dogguy.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:42:43PM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: On 13/04/2011 10:53, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: On 04/04/2011 12:56 PM, Jon Dowland wrote: On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management solution to handle all of these? Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. I sincerely hope that you're joking… At least, the rest of the project doesn't share this view. It's like saying that Desktop users are second class citizens, which is plain wrong! He didn't say anything you're implying. Some misunderstanding, I guess. Debian, as a universal OS, needs to support Servers and Desktops and ... properly. Any solution thus needs to handle all those cases properly. Then add the usual Ubuntu bashing: for all who don't need that kind of universality, there's Ubuntu (which, btw, also delivers server solutions). No-one is second class. Or, if I understand bzed right, Ubuntu is. :) Hauke -- .''`. Jan Hauke Rahm j...@debian.org www.jhr-online.de : :' : Debian Developer www.debian.org `. `'` Member of the Linux Foundationwww.linux.com `- Fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe www.fsfe.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:26:06 + (UTC), Felipe Sateler fsate...@debian.org wrote: On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:53:13 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: On 04/04/2011 12:56 PM, Jon Dowland wrote: On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management solution to handle all of these? Yes. For a distribution which is targeted to support servers properly, yes, definitely. For everything else there is Ubuntu. Surely a person managing a server can do aptitude install ifupdown network-manager-? You appear to want to inflict extra work on large swathes of our users. If that is the case, I'd like to see some sort of justification for that. What is it that installing N-M on servers will gain us or our users? I don't perceive the advantage. Many other people in this thread don't seem to perceive it. I don't believe that anyone's even hinted at the advantage, but perhaps I missed it. In the absence of such justification, I don't see what's wrong with the status quo (i.e. N-M on Gnome desktops by default, ifupdown elsewhere by default, with both choices entirely overridable by the user) Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/ |-| HANDS.COM Ltd.http://www.uk.debian.org/ |(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLAND pgpNE97l5E8wG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 01:39:38PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: Surely a person managing a server can do aptitude install ifupdown network-manager-? You appear to want to inflict extra work on large swathes of our users. If that is the case, I'd like to see some sort of justification for that. Does the following assumption hold? Desktop users favour fewer prompts at install time and more sane default choices. Server users want fine control over the nuances of installation, but harness additional technologies/options to help with installations (starting with expert mode and continuing with netboots and preseeding, other technologies like FAI, etc.; followed by a configuration management solution to finish implementing local policies). Therefore, slanting d-i towards fewer questions in normal priorities and more desktop-oriented smart defaults does not disadvantage server users, because they toggle the relevant switches to have greater control anyway. Or in other words, if a server user does an attended install via d-i, doesn't trigger expert mode and accepts the defaults for most questions, is it wrong if they end up with NetworkManager? Surely there are a lot of other customisatons they will need to perform to get going, in a similar category of risk (to remote operation) as changing the network plumbing (installing SSH? reconfiguring PAM? etc.) And finally, the vast majority of servers I have adminned have had very simple networking requirements, very similar to a desktop user: one network interface with a link, IP via DHCP (at least initially, later tweaked to be static). Of the hundreds of machines I've looked after, past and present, very, VERY few have had the need for the more interesting stuff: bridging for VM hosts, bonding, tunnelling and a few other bits and pieces for HA front-ends, that's about it. Where it has been necessary to reconfigure by hand, the burden of swapping some packages around would pale in comparison to writing the interfaces file. In the absence of such justification, I don't see what's wrong with the status quo (i.e. N-M on Gnome desktops by default, ifupdown elsewhere by default, with both choices entirely overridable by the user) Having said all of the above, and the thread being where it is now, I have to admit I can't remember what the value proposition was in the first place. Time to re-read... -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110413185302.gb4...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Stephan Seitz stse+deb...@fsing.rootsland.net writes: The only thing that I miss from ifupdown (and I configured bonds, bridges and vlans) is a good IPv6 support. I can’t separately activate or deactivate IPv4 or IPv6 parts of an interface. I have seen several requests for this feature, but I really don't understand why you'd want that. If an interface is configured as a dual stack interface, then I expect both stacks to be brought up and down (near) simultaneously. In fact, the one thing I dislike about ifupdown is the illusion that there can be both an iface eth0 inet and an iface eth0 inet6. There can't. It's the same interface running two protocols. I would have preferred something like some routers do: iface eth0 address .. ipv6address .. Juniper router do of course do this even better, splitting the IPv4 and IPv6 configuration in separate family blocks, but still grouping all the protocol families under the same unit (representing a VLAN, physical port, or some other layer 2 interface). But that is a bit too late to implement in ifupdown. If you really want to handle the protocols individually, then don't configure a dual stack interface in the first place. Use separate vlans or ports. Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87y63ex79x@nemi.mork.no
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Jon Dowland j...@debian.org writes: Does the following assumption hold? Desktop users favour fewer prompts at install time and more sane default choices. Server users want fine control over the nuances of installation, but harness additional technologies/options to help with installations (starting with expert mode and continuing with netboots and preseeding, other technologies like FAI, etc.; followed by a configuration management solution to finish implementing local policies). I think you're conflating the administrator of one server with the administrator of many servers. A server administator can often be simply someone administrating *one* machine, without expert mode or preseeding or any of the rest; simply setting up a single headless machine in a remote data centre. So network access, once available to the machine, must remain available during the installation and/or upgrade process unless explicitly disabled. Therefore, slanting d-i towards fewer questions in normal priorities and more desktop-oriented smart defaults does not disadvantage server users, because they toggle the relevant switches to have greater control anyway. So long as the default *is* smart. A default which can in many cases leave the remote user without access to the machine they're installing is not smart. Or in other words, if a server user does an attended install via d-i, doesn't trigger expert mode and accepts the defaults for most questions, is it wrong if they end up with NetworkManager? I think it is wrong, based on the fact expressed in these threads that NetworkManager can, by default during upgrade, bring down the network connection. Surely there are a lot of other customisatons they will need to perform to get going, in a similar category of risk (to remote operation) as changing the network plumbing (installing SSH? reconfiguring PAM? etc.) Such a server administrator as I've described above has the expectation that the networking configuration, if it works once on installation, won't need to be changed nor special packages installed to keep it working on upgrade. That is a reasonable expectation, and AIUI argues against NetworkManager as default. -- \ “I must say that I find television very educational. The minute | `\ somebody turns it on, I go to the library and read a book.” | _o__)—Groucho Marx | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vcyh4xsr@benfinney.id.au
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 02:11:38PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote: Installing NM by default will break systems which where running the last 12 years without flaws. No, it will not. It will not impact *running* systems at all. It will only impact newly installed systems. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110411093754.gb29...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 02:18:38PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote: This is Exacly what I mean with NM. I do not wan to be bothered with reading some hours documentations on how to tweek NM to work with my four 10GE NICs. And you wouldn't be - because, once again - you are not forced to use whatever the default solution is, you have the freedom to switch to another, just like people who currently *do* use network-manager have taken advantage of. We are really going around and around with the same set of misconceptions and misunderstandings. Please carefully read the thread again before re-iterating any more mistakes! -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2011040209.gc29...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Hello Jon Dowland, Am 2011-04-11 10:37:54, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 02:11:38PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote: Installing NM by default will break systems which where running the last 12 years without flaws. No, it will not. It will not impact *running* systems at all. It will only impact newly installed systems. And this is exactly the problem... I can clone a System using a tarbal and then maybe upgrade which would work but this mean, I have t transfer a very huge Tarball or run a script which install from scratch with old setings, but if the default install NM the whole system will break because you will lost the network connection and can not more reconnect... You need a local administrator to solv this problem, which in my case and probably many others, lead to big problems. Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening Michelle Konzack -- # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ## Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux itsystems@tdnet France EURL itsystems@tdnet UG (limited liability) Owner Michelle KonzackOwner Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 (homeoffice) 50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17 67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.flexray4linux.org/ http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.can4linux.org/ Jabber linux4miche...@jabber.ccc.de ICQ#328449886 Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Hello Jon Dowland, Am 2011-04-11 12:02:09, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: And you wouldn't be - because, once again - you are not forced to use whatever the default solution is, you have the freedom to switch to another, just like people who currently *do* use network-manager have taken advantage of. WILL be there a choice to install ifupdownd instead of NM? And what about automated instalations? I think, DI has to support a Fast-Install-Option for Desktop and Server where the first one installs NM by default and the second one IFUPDOWND. We are really going around and around with the same set of misconceptions and misunderstandings. Please carefully read the thread again before re-iterating any more mistakes! This thread is talking about network-manager as default which is definitively no go. Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening Michelle Konzack -- # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ## Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux itsystems@tdnet France EURL itsystems@tdnet UG (limited liability) Owner Michelle KonzackOwner Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 (homeoffice) 50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17 67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.flexray4linux.org/ http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.can4linux.org/ Jabber linux4miche...@jabber.ccc.de ICQ#328449886 Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Le lundi 11 avril 2011 à 13:18 +0200, Michelle Konzack a écrit : I think, DI has to support a Fast-Install-Option for Desktop and Server where the first one installs NM by default and the second one IFUPDOWND. This is what is already done for squeeze. If OTOH we get d-i to run NM natively, that would lead to NM being installed by default on both cases. This thread is talking about network-manager as default which is definitively no go. *shrug* -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1302534366.3236.228.camel@pi0307572
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Zitat von Stanislav Maslovski stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com: On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 10:51:08PM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote: Am Mittwoch 06 April 2011, 19:05:11 schrieb Stanislav Maslovski: On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:29:05AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Then you can stack all soft of stuff on top of it, and get them to work manually for your specific setup, and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. ^^ The underlined claims, btw, are also false. You made clear that you think of yourself as the ultimate master of ifupdown. So what? That tells us _nothing_ about the rest of the world... First of all, that is only your interpretation which is wrong. Second, there is no point in turning a discussion about ifupdown vs. NM into a discussion of my abilities/disabilities. I am also not totally happy about network-manager but I still use it as it gives me a working wireless network on my laptop without having to spend hours reading endless documentation and writing multiple configuration files (hey, just for the purpose of getting _one_ network device running at two different locations!). Been there, done that for quite some time, with wired and wireless networking, analog/2G/3G modem and ISDN dialup. It was always a pain to setup and working if not too much goes wrong. Still I was switching to network-manager once available as for me it's not painless but much less pain. I remember one difficult case: my university was using cisco equipment to do the VPN. So I used vpnc to connect. How do you tell ifupdown to only start vpnc once wpa_supplicant made the connection to a specific network? Additionally, they used a different SSID for each AP, so no roaming but manual selection. That was a nightmare to setup as you had to have one entry for each AP! Additionally, wpa_supplicant was only working when the interface was not down, I had to manually figure that out to add a proper pre-up entry line. Yummy. I currently use ifupdown only for a 3G connection but only because the integration of plasma-widget-networkmanagement with network-manager's use of modemmanager is not working (already solved upstream according to the developers blog but not in Debian). So I am using pon/poff for that. However, the example gprs chat script for PIN entry is not correct (not even according to the applicable standard and my modem happens to take that part very strictly). I am currently using another solution to correctly enter the PIN code (a program that I wrote years ago happens to do that). Believe it or not but modemmanager would have been my preferred solution. No, I didn't file a bug about that, not until I found a working solution for that chat script. The network-manager solution still suffers from lots of bugs e.g. the KDE applet not being able to reconnect to network-manager after an upgrade of the latter, or a capable CLI solution (cnetworkmanager cannot do everything, nothing useful is shipped with network-manager). I am with you that ifupdown should always be available as fallback but it's not _my_ preferred solution for a desktop. It's ok that some like to read hundreds of lines to setup something that should be a no-brainer, I don't. For a server, ifupdown is preferrable but there, even a simple shell script would always be sufficient! HS PS: You are missing one important thing from your wpa-roam snippets: you really should restrict each SSID entry to the MAC address of the AP. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110407125633.140870takqbbd...@v1539.ncsrv.de
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Hello Philip Hands, Am 2011-04-06 10:13:19, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: I think this is the vital difference -- those that prefer ifupdown do so because they prefer to be in tight control of what is happening on their systems, whereas those that prefer NM don't want to be bothered about networking, they just want things to work. This is exactly what I mean! I do not want to be bothered on a server with a tool which does not work and break all the times! Yes I have tried NM, but isnstalling this crap by default break my Sun and IBM Sevrers. I do not wan to to be bothered by Seting up NM and want o have a SIMPLE ifupdownd which does not bother me with forcimg me to drive 2x 500km to the datacenter (I am in Strasbourg and the datacenter is in Nürnberg) the get my server back running When someone wanders into an Internet cafe and plugs a wire into their Ethernet port, they just want a notification to tell them that they're online. I want the same to which is not possibel with NM. Installing NM by default will break systems which where running the last 12 years without flaws. If some dimwit sysadmin at my co-lo plugs something new into my server I want _absolutely_ _nothing_ to occur, not even a new process -- a syslog message would be fine. And what s if NM Cut-Off our Internet conenction? This is what happen to me. NM is NOT ROCKSOLID! ifupdown is proofen to work perfectly. We then seem to have a choice of installing something that works well for one group, and giving the others the chance to add the other (say, by including NM in the desktop task) ACK! , or installing the other and getting the people who want less to remove it -- given that we've already implemented the first, This will not work, becase installing NM by default will break server systems and you will have no access manymore the the server. and it seems to work fine, why would we want to force server installs of Debian (which may well be in the majority) to uselessly default to installing software that will either do a poor job for the life of the server, or incur the additional effort of removing it? Because it does not work and we definitively have not ANY event driven things on a server. Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening Michelle Konzack -- # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ## Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux itsystems@tdnet France EURL itsystems@tdnet UG (limited liability) Owner Michelle KonzackOwner Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 (homeoffice) 50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17 67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.flexray4linux.org/ http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.can4linux.org/ Jabber linux4miche...@jabber.ccc.de ICQ#328449886 Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Hello Hendrik Sattler, Am 2011-04-07 12:56:33, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: I am also not totally happy about network-manager but I still use it as it gives me a working wireless network on my laptop without having to spend hours reading endless documentation and writing multiple configuration files This is Exacly what I mean with NM. I do not wan to be bothered with reading some hours documentations on how to tweek NM to work with my four 10GE NICs. NM refused to setup 2 external interfaces and two internal ones. Fortunately I had the server @home in my office and not in adistance of 500km in the datacenter! Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening Michelle Konzack -- # Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ## Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux itsystems@tdnet France EURL itsystems@tdnet UG (limited liability) Owner Michelle KonzackOwner Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 (homeoffice) 50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17 67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.flexray4linux.org/ http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/ http://www.can4linux.org/ Jabber linux4miche...@jabber.ccc.de ICQ#328449886 Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Hello, On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 07:29:05 +0200 Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote: Your limited knowledge is like jam. The less you have, the more you spread it. Well, you have just confirmed this statement. What you actually like about ifupdown is that it cannot do anything but extremely trivial setups. Then you can stack all soft of stuff on top of it, and get them to work manually for your specific setup, and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. Maybe you just don't know how to 'cook' it properly? -- WBR, Andrew signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On 06 Apr 09:10, Andrew O. Shadoura wrote: Hello, On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 07:29:05 +0200 Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote: Your limited knowledge is like jam. The less you have, the more you spread it. Well, you have just confirmed this statement. What you actually like about ifupdown is that it cannot do anything but extremely trivial setups. Then you can stack all soft of stuff on top of it, and get them to work manually for your specific setup, and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. Maybe you just don't know how to 'cook' it properly? (NOTE: Not an endorsement of n-m in anyways, but...) Everything that you can do with ifupdown you can do with network manager, which will also happily trigger the ifupdown pre/post scripts if you enable that plugin. Personally, I'm very happy with ifupdown on my laptop, and there's some truly odd networking at times on here... and on the work laptop, so far n-m has been ok (I'm giving it a chance to not explode, and I don't need that one to have networking if I'm not logged in to it). Cheers, -- Brett Parker http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ PGP Fingerprint 1A9E C066 EDEE 6746 36CB BD7F 479E C24F 95C7 1D61 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110406092724.gf3...@sommitrealweird.co.uk
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 07:29:05 +0200, Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote: ... and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. I think this is the vital difference -- those that prefer ifupdown do so because they prefer to be in tight control of what is happening on their systems, whereas those that prefer NM don't want to be bothered about networking, they just want things to work. When someone wanders into an Internet cafe and plugs a wire into their Ethernet port, they just want a notification to tell them that they're online. If some dimwit sysadmin at my co-lo plugs something new into my server I want _absolutely_ _nothing_ to occur, not even a new process -- a syslog message would be fine. I don't want to have to learn a lot of complicated tricks to turn all the cleverness in NM off to achieve this, because an upgrade is bound to introduce new cleverness that I'll then need to learn to turn off, and each repeat of that is going to be a painful discovery. I also don't want a lot of code I don't routinely use sitting on my disks waiting for someone to discover an exploit. So, clearly one size is never going to fit all. We then seem to have a choice of installing something that works well for one group, and giving the others the chance to add the other (say, by including NM in the desktop task), or installing the other and getting the people who want less to remove it -- given that we've already implemented the first, and it seems to work fine, why would we want to force server installs of Debian (which may well be in the majority) to uselessly default to installing software that will either do a poor job for the life of the server, or incur the additional effort of removing it? On the other hand, if NM based udeb can do a better job of guessing what's going on from within D-I, and can be preseeded to not bother probing for things that are inappropriate, and can be persuaded to configure ifupdown for the server scenario (with no need to put N-M, dbus, etc onto the target) then fine, let's use it in D-I. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/ |-| HANDS.COM Ltd.http://www.uk.debian.org/ |(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLAND pgpGsHtSea6i5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
Hi, On 2011-04-05 20:37:39 +0300, Andrew O. Shadoura wrote: Hello, On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 14:31:40 +0200 Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net wrote: [About the general problem of documentation] The problem is to find the correct tools and the correct documentation. For instance, imagine the average user who wants for Ethernet (eth0), to do the following automatically (for a laptop): 1. use some fixed IP address if there's some peer 192.168.0.1 with some given MAC address; 2. otherwise, if an Ethernet cable is plugged in (and only in this case), start a DHCP client; 3. make things still work after a suspend/resume. I now know how to do this. But I still wonder what documentation a user should read to achieve such a configuration. It is normal that a user may want to use his laptop from network to network and things work without manual reconfiguration. Of course, man guessnet. Just few lines. First, my remark was more about: how does the user find that he needs guessnet in the first place (and not some other tool)? One often find tools via references from man pages or package descriptions, but this doesn't seem to be the case here. Moreover, guessnet is sufficient for (1), but not for (2) and (3) (this part is covered below). mapping eth1 script guessnet-ifupdown map default: dhcp iface eth-home inet static test peer address 192.168.0.1 mac ... ... iface dhcp inet dhcp That's not sufficient, because if a DHCP client is still running (e.g. because the previous configuration used DHCP), one needs to kill it before using a fixed IP address (in eth-home). My solution is to use a wrapper to guessnet that does this job. The last requirement is fulfilled by means of installing ifplugd. Well, ifplugd didn't work for me. I don't know what the real causes were. There was at least a $PATH problem, because contrary to ifupdown, the ifplugd init script doesn't include /usr/local/sbin in $PATH (and the error message was not logged). There are still open bugs that could be related to my problems with it. I'm using netplug instead, but again, there's a bug with the default configuration (and it seems that ifplugd is affected by this too). See: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=619866 I now use a workaround, but to find the cause of the problem, I had to do a strace in a /etc/init.d script, in particular causing the machine to be sometimes unbootable. Really, this is not what an end user should do. -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arénaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110406114043.ga13...@prunille.vinc17.org
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
On 2011-04-06 07:24:30 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: There are several hacks to do that (like guessnet or laptop-net), but I don’t think this can work correctly in the general case with IPv4. FYI, I had used laptop-net in the past, but it has been removed from Debian: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=581442 This is another problem for the user: he may spend time to try to configure his network with some tool, but then the tool is removed... -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arénaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110406121135.gc13...@prunille.vinc17.org
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 02:11:35PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2011-04-06 07:24:30 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: There are several hacks to do that (like guessnet or laptop-net), but I don’t think this can work correctly in the general case with IPv4. FYI, I had used laptop-net in the past, but it has been removed from Debian: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=581442 This is another problem for the user: he may spend time to try to configure his network with some tool, but then the tool is removed... Absolutely. An appropriate solution is something that has enough momentum behind it that this is very unlikely. Whatever else can be said about it, NetworkManager certainly has that momentum. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110406134856.ga15...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Brett Parker idu...@sommitrealweird.co.uk writes: Everything that you can do with ifupdown you can do with network manager, That's simply not true. You cannot use n-m remotely without having some out-of-band access. For a start. Fix that, and I'll come back with the next issue. You don't seem to have a clue wrt the power of ifupdown... And no, to all the pedants around here, I have not opened a bug report regarding this. There are more than enough of those already, and the maintainer responses clearly shows that they don't care about such fundamental design flaws. See e.g. bug #432322. Bjørn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vcyr79vb@nemi.mork.no
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Stanislav Maslovski stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com (Sun Apr 3 12:37:26 2011):
On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 10:11:03AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
But if network-manager would become default and ifupdown an optional
replacement, I would question Debian's capacity to make technically
excellent decisions and wonder, how much we have been dragged along
by user-friendly distros and slid off the track.
I agree. If that happens I will seriously think about moving to
another distro (I have been using Debian since around 1999). Or maybe
to a *BSD.
Using Debian (and partly supporting it) since about 1996: as soon as the
network manager and similar tools become the default, it will be Debian's
last days on my and our customers machines.
Best regards from Dresden/Germany
Viele Grüße aus Dresden
Heiko Schlittermann
--
SCHLITTERMANN.de internet unix support -
Heiko Schlittermann, Dipl.-Ing. (TU) - {fon,fax}: +49.351.802998{1,3} -
gnupg encrypted messages are welcome --- key ID: 48D0359B -
gnupg fingerprint: 3061 CFBF 2D88 F034 E8D2 7E92 EE4E AC98 48D0 359B -
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
Hello, On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 13:40:43 +0200 Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net wrote: That's not sufficient, because if a DHCP client is still running (e.g. because the previous configuration used DHCP), one needs to kill it before using a fixed IP address (in eth-home). If you do `ifdown`, either manually or by unplugging the cable, the problem doesn't appear to exist. Calling ifupdown may be inserted into the suspend/resume scripts. -- WBR, Andrew signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Heiko Schlittermann h...@schlittermann.de wrote: Stanislav Maslovski stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com (Sun Apr 3 12:37:26 2011): On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 10:11:03AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: But if network-manager would become default and ifupdown an optional replacement, I would question Debian's capacity to make technically excellent decisions and wonder, how much we have been dragged along by user-friendly distros and slid off the track. I agree. If that happens I will seriously think about moving to another distro (I have been using Debian since around 1999). Or maybe to a *BSD. Using Debian (and partly supporting it) since about 1996: as soon as the network manager and similar tools become the default, it will be Debian's last days on my and our customers machines. Wow. Just because a certain network configuration system is the *default*? Are you this polar about text editors, web browsers, DE, and other tools, too? It seems like this thread is no longer productive. -matt zagrabelny -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTi=7gwtax3meiwtftc3yxpykgif...@mail.gmail.com
Re: network-manager as default? No!
* 2011-04-06T16:45:03+02:00 * Heiko Schlittermann wrote: Stanislav Maslovski stanislav.maslov...@gmail.com (Sun Apr 3 12:37:26 2011): On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 10:11:03AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: But if network-manager would become default and ifupdown an optional replacement, I would question Debian's capacity to make technically excellent decisions and wonder, how much we have been dragged along by user-friendly distros and slid off the track. I agree. If that happens I will seriously think about moving to another distro (I have been using Debian since around 1999). Or maybe to a *BSD. Using Debian (and partly supporting it) since about 1996: as soon as the network manager and similar tools become the default, it will be Debian's last days on my and our customers machines. There is a pretty good technical discussion going on about this subject at the very moment. If you have useful information to add to that discussion please share it. Stating that if you do this, I'm gonna leave does not help. Technical information is more useful. Someone who really understands how different alternatives work could add valuable information and opinions to the discussion. You know, everyone wants to make Debian better and there is this usual challenge of having different tools with different advantages and disadvantages. How to combine as much advantages as possible? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sjtvqssw@mithlond.arda
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:29:05AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le mardi 05 avril 2011 à 02:08 +0400, Stanislav Maslovski a écrit : Well, that is not the question of how many, that is the question of can you do a given task or not with a given tool. NM is limited in all possible ways I can imagine, and also buggy. On the contrary, with ifupdown, one for sure can do things that I even cannot imagine due to my limited knowledge. Your limited knowledge is like jam. The less you have, the more you spread it. Thanks, I also love how you show your bitching side on this mailing list when you have no better arguments. What you actually like about ifupdown is that it cannot do anything but extremely trivial setups. No, you are wrong. Then you can stack all soft of stuff on top of it, and get them to work manually for your specific setup, and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. I am just following the best practices that are currently available. -- Stanislav -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110406165218.GA5910@kaiba.homelan
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:29:05AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Then you can stack all soft of stuff on top of it, and get them to work manually for your specific setup, and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. ^^ The underlined claims, btw, are also false. -- Stanislav -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110406170511.GA7397@kaiba.homelan
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Am Mittwoch 06 April 2011, 19:05:11 schrieb Stanislav Maslovski: On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:29:05AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Then you can stack all soft of stuff on top of it, and get them to work manually for your specific setup, and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. ^^ The underlined claims, btw, are also false. You made clear that you think of yourself as the ultimate master of ifupdown. So what? That tells us _nothing_ about the rest of the world... HS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201104062251.08798.p...@hendrik-sattler.de
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
On 2011-04-06 18:26:45 +0300, Andrew O. Shadoura wrote: If you do `ifdown`, either manually or by unplugging the cable, the problem doesn't appear to exist. Calling ifupdown may be inserted into the suspend/resume scripts. I wonder why this isn't done by default. -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arénaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110407004833.gd13...@prunille.vinc17.org
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 10:51:08PM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote: Am Mittwoch 06 April 2011, 19:05:11 schrieb Stanislav Maslovski: On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:29:05AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Then you can stack all soft of stuff on top of it, and get them to work manually for your specific setup, and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. ^^ The underlined claims, btw, are also false. You made clear that you think of yourself as the ultimate master of ifupdown. So what? That tells us _nothing_ about the rest of the world... First of all, that is only your interpretation which is wrong. Second, there is no point in turning a discussion about ifupdown vs. NM into a discussion of my abilities/disabilities. -- Stanislav -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110407040959.GA16611@kaiba.homelan
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
* Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org [110404 14:05]: It seems to be a common belief between some developers that users should have to read dozens of pages of documentation before attempting to do anything. You mix two things up here: Almost noone demands a system that is only configurable after reading a dozen pages of documentation to get it work. But what many people[1] want is that you can make it work if you read some dozen pages of documentation. It's the elementary freedom to be able to fix it yourself. Having the source and the right to modify the software is one part, but in practise having a system that one can understand in depth and actualy force to do what one want is an important aspect for people to choose Debian. Having a nice automagic opaque interface with three buttons of the kind on, off, repair might look very user-friendly. But as every paternalism it is only nice as long as you want what your superior wants. And many people react very emotional to being the inferior of a computer too stupid to understand anything. Bernhard R. Link [1] especially those that have always been a large group of Debian users -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405061554.ga2...@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
In other news for Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 08:15:55AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link has been seen typing: But what many people[1] want is that you can make it work if you read some dozen pages of documentation. Personally, what I want is a setup that does not drop all active network interfaces during a software upgrade because it needs to restart a daemon. Making network-manager honor an option along the lines of --leave-interfaces during stop or restart would be a good start. -- Rens Houben |opinions are mine Resident linux guru and sysadmin | if my employers have one Systemec Internet Services. |they'll tell you themselves PGP key at http://marduk.systemec.nl/~shadur/shadur.key.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405070633.ge9...@proteus.systemec.nl
Re: network-manager as default? No!
Jon Dowland wrote: On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management solution to handle all of these? If it could be easily substituted for another solution that was better suited to tasks which a majority of users will not use, then surely that is fine. True. ifupdown doesn't do those either by default; the argument was that it's *extendable* enough to be able to do these via simple addon hooks. Regards, Faidon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d9ac81f.90...@debian.org
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
On 2011-04-04 17:31:18 +0400, Stanislav Maslovski wrote: On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:35:10PM +0530, Josselin Mouette wrote: It seems to be a common belief between some developers that users should have to read dozens of pages of documentation before attempting to do anything. I’m happy that not all of us share this elitist view of software. I thought we were building the Universal Operating System, not the Operating System for bearded gurus. I do not think that reading documentation before trying to achieve something is that elitist. [About the general problem of documentation] The problem is to find the correct tools and the correct documentation. For instance, imagine the average user who wants for Ethernet (eth0), to do the following automatically (for a laptop): 1. use some fixed IP address if there's some peer 192.168.0.1 with some given MAC address; 2. otherwise, if an Ethernet cable is plugged in (and only in this case), start a DHCP client; 3. make things still work after a suspend/resume. I now know how to do this. But I still wonder what documentation a user should read to achieve such a configuration. It is normal that a user may want to use his laptop from network to network and things work without manual reconfiguration. And in the case of wpa_supplicant, it is definitely not dozens of pages. Basically, it is just man interfaces man wpa_supplicant.conf zless /usr/share/doc/wpasupplicant/README.Debian.gz How does the average user know that he would need to read these pages and not others? (and for most cases just reading that README.Debian should be enough) Yes, the README.Debian seems to give very good information. But users used to man pages may not have the idea to look at this file. I would have thought that users should look at HOWTO's first, but those provided by Debian are obsolete (Networking-Overview-HOWTO is more than 10 years old). The wireless networks in public locations are usually open and do not require any specific configuration; the most of them are catched with a simple roaming setup outlined in that README from above, supplanted with a default /e/n/interfaces stanza for DHCP-based networks. If one instead prefers using a GUI, then there is wpa_gui with which one may scan for networks, select the needed one, change parameters, etc. The wpa_supplicant(8) man page mentions the CLI (wpa_cli), but not the GUI! So, how would the average user know its existence? -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arénaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405123140.ga10...@prunille.vinc17.org
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 02:31:40PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2011-04-04 17:31:18 +0400, Stanislav Maslovski wrote: On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:35:10PM +0530, Josselin Mouette wrote: It seems to be a common belief between some developers that users should have to read dozens of pages of documentation before attempting to do anything. I’m happy that not all of us share this elitist view of software. I thought we were building the Universal Operating System, not the Operating System for bearded gurus. I do not think that reading documentation before trying to achieve something is that elitist. [About the general problem of documentation] The problem is to find the correct tools and the correct documentation. For instance, imagine the average user who wants for Ethernet (eth0), to do the following automatically (for a laptop): 1. use some fixed IP address if there's some peer 192.168.0.1 with some given MAC address; 2. otherwise, if an Ethernet cable is plugged in (and only in this case), start a DHCP client; 3. make things still work after a suspend/resume. [...] The average user doesn't know what an IP address, MAC address or DHCP are. There's a reason why d-i defaults to DHCP without even asking now. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking. - Albert Camus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405123456.gu2...@decadent.org.uk
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
Hello, On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 14:31:40 +0200 Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net wrote: [About the general problem of documentation] The problem is to find the correct tools and the correct documentation. For instance, imagine the average user who wants for Ethernet (eth0), to do the following automatically (for a laptop): 1. use some fixed IP address if there's some peer 192.168.0.1 with some given MAC address; 2. otherwise, if an Ethernet cable is plugged in (and only in this case), start a DHCP client; 3. make things still work after a suspend/resume. I now know how to do this. But I still wonder what documentation a user should read to achieve such a configuration. It is normal that a user may want to use his laptop from network to network and things work without manual reconfiguration. Of course, man guessnet. Just few lines. mapping eth1 script guessnet-ifupdown map default: dhcp iface eth-home inet static test peer address 192.168.0.1 mac ... ... iface dhcp inet dhcp The last requirement is fulfilled by means of installing ifplugd. -- WBR, Andrew signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
On 2011-04-05, Andrew O. Shadoura bugzi...@tut.by wrote: Of course, man guessnet. Just few lines. Last time I looked guessnet was orphaned, though. Kind regards Philipp Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnipmlga.gou.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
Hi, Am Dienstag, den 05.04.2011, 17:48 + schrieb Philipp Kern: On 2011-04-05, Andrew O. Shadoura bugzi...@tut.by wrote: Of course, man guessnet. Just few lines. Last time I looked guessnet was orphaned, though. but still very useful and allowing me to have a great network setup that, once set up, automatically and invisibly adjust to whatever place I am. Greetings, Joachim PS: This e-mail is relatively useless. To lessen this a bit: Kudos to Enrico for creating guessnet! -- Joachim nomeata Breitner Debian Developer nome...@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
#include hallo.h * Kelly Clowers [Mon, Apr 04 2011, 02:06:01PM]: On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 07:29, Sune Vuorela nos...@vuorela.dk wrote: I don't consider myself 'stupid user', but I haven't yet been able to put my laptop on wpa network without the use of network manager. I never did get nm or wicd to work. Only with ifupdown+wpa_supplicant was I able to make WiFi work. This was with an ordinary home router with WPA2 PSK and an Atheros PCIe NIC So, and where exactly is your bug report? Don't you think that the developers deserve that minimum of respect that you tell them (yes, them, not some blog/mailing list) that there is a problem? Regards, Eduard. -- Ganneff kde und tastatur? passt doch nicht mit dem nutzerprofil windepp zusammen :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405182524.ga25...@rotes76.wohnheim.uni-kl.de
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
Le mardi 05 avril 2011 à 14:31 +0200, Vincent Lefevre a écrit : For instance, imagine the average user who wants for Ethernet (eth0), to do the following automatically (for a laptop): 1. use some fixed IP address if there's some peer 192.168.0.1 with some given MAC address; There are several hacks to do that (like guessnet or laptop-net), but I don’t think this can work correctly in the general case with IPv4. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone, `-[…] I will see what I can do for you.” -- Jörg Schilling signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
Le mardi 05 avril 2011 à 02:08 +0400, Stanislav Maslovski a écrit : Well, that is not the question of how many, that is the question of can you do a given task or not with a given tool. NM is limited in all possible ways I can imagine, and also buggy. On the contrary, with ifupdown, one for sure can do things that I even cannot imagine due to my limited knowledge. Your limited knowledge is like jam. The less you have, the more you spread it. What you actually like about ifupdown is that it cannot do anything but extremely trivial setups. Then you can stack all soft of stuff on top of it, and get them to work manually for your specific setup, and since it’s not event-based you have to hard-code the way your network is set up. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone, `-[…] I will see what I can do for you.” -- Jörg Schilling signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Flaming as a way to reach technical quality? No! (was: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy))
On 08:18 Mon 04 Apr , Raphael Hertzog wrote: RH Hi, RH On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote: Stupid scheme (intended for stupid users) should be based on ifupdown but shouldn't replace it. RH Please refrain from calling people stupid users just because they use a RH software that you don't like. There was a way User can do anything, the way was replaced by the way User can do something in list. Obviously that this action has been done for stupid users. Yes, the old scheme *had* some defects, but new scheme *is* a defect. But Ok, %s/stupid/ordinary/g I agree that we must think about ordinary users but I disagree that we must waste good instruments to please these users. -- . ''`. Dmitry E. Oboukhov : :’ : email: un...@debian.org jabber://un...@uvw.ru `. `~’ GPGKey: 1024D / F8E26537 2006-11-21 `- 1B23 D4F8 8EC0 D902 0555 E438 AB8C 00CF F8E2 6537 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Flaming as a way to reach technical quality? No! (was: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy))
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 10:52:33AM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote: On 08:18 Mon 04 Apr , Raphael Hertzog wrote: RH Hi, RH On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote: Stupid scheme (intended for stupid users) should be based on ifupdown but shouldn't replace it. RH Please refrain from calling people stupid users just because they use a RH software that you don't like. There was a way User can do anything, the way was replaced by the way User can do something in list. Obviously that this action has been done for stupid users. Yes, a user can do anything with ifconfig if his time has no value. I am happily using network manager on my laptop, because unlike ifconfig it's easy to configure for use on new wireless networks. I am not happy that network manager bypasses ifconfig to do this; I would have much preferred a daemon that could properly integrate with the existing infrastructure we had. But neither that, nor you calling me a stupid user, is much motivation for me to go back to the pain of managing wireless connections via ifupdown. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Flaming as a way to reach technical quality? No! (was: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy))
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 00:00:01 -0700 Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote: There was a way User can do anything, the way was replaced by the way User can do something in list. Obviously that this action has been done for stupid users. Yes, a user can do anything with ifconfig if his time has no value. I am happily using network manager on my laptop, because unlike ifconfig it's easy to configure for use on new wireless networks. I am not happy that network manager bypasses ifconfig to do this; I would have much preferred a daemon that could properly integrate with the existing infrastructure we had. But neither that, nor you calling me a stupid user, is much motivation for me to go back to the pain of managing wireless connections via ifupdown. I wouldn't go back to wireless via ifupdown either, I'd use wicd because I've had my share of problems with network-manager. The real issue, for me, is that I don't want to go to the pain of managing USB networking connections via a daemon which is predicated on managing wireless connections and/or complex bridging and VPN requirements. There needs to be a simple tool with few dependencies and there needs to be a complex solution with all the power that some users need. One tool does not suit all here. It's not just about daemon vs GUI frontend or whether to use DBus or Python - it's about having two or more tools which work together instead of one simple tool which gets side-stepped by a more complex tool because of a poor design. -- Neil Williams = http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ pgpCSFMYAUNM4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 12:00:01AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 10:52:33AM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote: Yes, a user can do anything with ifconfig if his time has no value. I am happily using network manager on my laptop, because unlike ifconfig it's easy to configure for use on new wireless networks. Well, actually configuring a wireless network with wpa_supplicant and ifupdown is not hard at all and does not require too much time, _if_ a user has developed a good habbit of reading documentation first. It is also preferable in that sense that you configure it once and it works for years, surviving upgrades, etc. So in the end you conserve your time, and not loose your time. There is also a basic GUI if one needs it (wpa_gui). I am not happy that network manager bypasses ifconfig to do this; I would have much preferred a daemon that could properly integrate with the existing infrastructure we had. Exactly. There is ifplugd that implements some of the functionality that is required to support dynamically appearing and disappearing connections. It is a simple daemon that calls ifupdown when needed, so that the old and good way of network configuration is respected. But ifplugd needs some love, because it was mostly intended to be used with ethernet cable connections (I managed to use it also with dynamic tap interfaces, though). -- Stanislav -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110404075506.GA636@kaiba.homelan
Re: network-manager as default? No!
In other news for Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:20:18PM +0200, Patrick Matthäi has been seen typing: Am 03.04.2011 18:22, schrieb Faidon Liambotis: And, above all, losing the network configuration, even for a second, just because you restarted a daemon (or that daemon died) shouldn't be acceptable for the primary network configuration of our distribution. Full ACK. I also made those experiences with two fedora servers, who are using per default NM :( Agreed. Back a couple months ago I was updating my home system over SSH and when it updated network-manager it cheerfully downed the interface and broke the connection, which in turn interrupted the upgrade process so that the interface didn't come back /up/ either. I don't know if that's been fixed in more recent versions; needless to say I purged it and everything associated and haven't touched it since. -- Rens Houben |opinions are mine Resident linux guru and sysadmin | if my employers have one Systemec Internet Services. |they'll tell you themselves PGP key at http://marduk.systemec.nl/~shadur/shadur.key.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110404083336.gd9...@proteus.systemec.nl
Re: Flaming as a way to reach technical quality? No! (was: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy))
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 12:00:01AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 10:52:33AM +0400, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote: On 08:18 Mon 04 Apr , Raphael Hertzog wrote: RH Hi, RH On Mon, 04 Apr 2011, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote: Stupid scheme (intended for stupid users) should be based on ifupdown but shouldn't replace it. RH Please refrain from calling people stupid users just because they use a RH software that you don't like. There was a way User can do anything, the way was replaced by the way User can do something in list. Obviously that this action has been done for stupid users. Yes, a user can do anything with ifconfig if his time has no value. I am happily using network manager on my laptop, because unlike ifconfig it's easy to configure for use on new wireless networks. I am not happy that network manager bypasses ifconfig to do this; [...] I am. NM uses the correct interface, i.e. netlink. ifconfig is a BSD legacy. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking. - Albert Camus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110404103130.gf2...@decadent.org.uk
Re: network-manager as default? No!
On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 07:22:47PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: It also can't do VLANs (.1q), bridges, bonds and all possible permutations of the above. I'd speculate that it also wouldn't be able to do things like 1k (or more) interfaces. It also doesn't support hooks to be able to do more advanced setups, such as multihoming, policy routing, QoS, etc. Is it necessary for the distribution's *default* network-management solution to handle all of these? If it could be easily substituted for another solution that was better suited to tasks which a majority of users will not use, then surely that is fine. (although I'd like to get NM and bridging working more nicely personally, I consider this more of a feature bug than an RC one) And, above all, losing the network configuration, even for a second, just because you restarted a daemon (or that daemon died) shouldn't be acceptable for the primary network configuration of our distribution. IMHO this is a reasonable requirement, yes. -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110404105623.gc14...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 01:11:15AM +0400, Stanislav Maslovski wrote: Why on earth would I do that? It does not match my needs at all. For instance, this laptop sometimes connects to a couple of remote LANs through VPNs, so that I have to set up routing in a not completely trivial manner. I rarely have to use VPNs myself, but when I do, I find network-manager-pptp the most reliable way to do so. -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110404105904.gd14...@deckard.alcopop.org
Re: Flaming as a way to reach technical quality? No! (was: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy))
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote: There needs to be a simple tool with few dependencies and there needs to be a complex solution with all the power that some users need. One tool does not suit all here. It's not just about daemon vs GUI frontend or whether to use DBus or Python - it's about having two or more tools which work together instead of one simple tool which gets side-stepped by a more complex tool because of a poor design. It does seem likely that there won't be one tool that satisfies all requirements. The current situation of giving users the choice of ifupdown, NetworkManager, wicd, and probably other things seems good. It doesn't seem likely that I would want NM on one of my servers. But having it on my laptop and netbook would be good if it worked as desired. Last time I tested NM it didn't work as desired - or at least not with the amount of effort I was prepared to put into it. If the plan is to depend more on NM in the next release then I'll probably test it some more on a laptop running Unstable and file some bugs. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Bloghttp://doc.coker.com.au/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201104042159.43852.russ...@coker.com.au
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
Le lundi 04 avril 2011 à 11:55 +0400, Stanislav Maslovski a écrit : Well, actually configuring a wireless network with wpa_supplicant and ifupdown is not hard at all and does not require too much time, _if_ a user has developed a good habbit of reading documentation first. It seems to be a common belief between some developers that users should have to read dozens of pages of documentation before attempting to do anything. I’m happy that not all of us share this elitist view of software. I thought we were building the Universal Operating System, not the Operating System for bearded gurus. It is also preferable in that sense that you configure it once and it works for years, surviving upgrades, etc. So in the end you conserve your time, and not loose your time. Do you even know in what kind of contexts a laptop with wireless connection is actually used? Because from your sentence it looks like you live in a different world. -- .''`. : :' : “You would need to ask a lawyer if you don't know `. `' that a handshake of course makes a valid contract.” `--- J???rg Schilling -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1301918712.3448.124.camel@pi0307572
Re: Flaming as a way to reach technical quality? No! (was: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy))
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:59:43PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote: On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote: There needs to be a simple tool with few dependencies and there needs to be a complex solution with all the power that some users need. One tool does not suit all here. It's not just about daemon vs GUI frontend or whether to use DBus or Python - it's about having two or more tools which work together instead of one simple tool which gets side-stepped by a more complex tool because of a poor design. It does seem likely that there won't be one tool that satisfies all requirements. The current situation of giving users the choice of ifupdown, NetworkManager, wicd, and probably other things seems good. [...] We should be able to say 'for these sorts of configurations, X is probably best, but for those, Y is better.' (I suspect that no single X could be recommended for all configurations.) Giving users 5 choices and no guidance would be unhelpful. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking. - Albert Camus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110404121455.gk2...@decadent.org.uk
Re: Back to technical discussion? Yes! (was: network-manager as default? No!)
Well, actually configuring a wireless network with wpa_supplicant and ifupdown is not hard at all and does not require too much time, _if_ a user has developed a good habbit of reading documentation first. JM It seems to be a common belief between some developers that users should JM have to read dozens of pages of documentation before attempting to do JM anything. JM I’m happy that not all of us share this elitist view of software. I JM thought we were building the Universal Operating System, not the JM Operating System for bearded gurus. User MUST study each OS he uses. If he doesn't want he will be forced to pay the other people who will tune his (user's) system. There is no discrimination here. I'm not a guru, but I don't understand why Debian must be broken to please a user who doesn't want to read anything. -- . ''`. Dmitry E. Oboukhov : :’ : email: un...@debian.org jabber://un...@uvw.ru `. `~’ GPGKey: 1024D / F8E26537 2006-11-21 `- 1B23 D4F8 8EC0 D902 0555 E438 AB8C 00CF F8E2 6537 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
