On 08/01/2011 07:15 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
On Sun, 2011-07-31 at 12:25 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 31.07.2011 12:17, schrieb David Woodhouse:
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 16:37 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
IIRC connman (i.e. NM's competition) can do the ARP magic, too.
I don't think so.
On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 13:43 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Bill McGonigle b...@bfccomputing.com wrote:
On 08/03/2011 01:19 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
The Ubuntu NM maintainer has posted a WIP patch that makes NM say it's
connected immediately if at least one
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 05:25:49PM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 13:43 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Bill McGonigle b...@bfccomputing.com
wrote:
On 08/03/2011 01:19 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
The Ubuntu NM maintainer has posted a WIP
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 17:12 -0400, Bill McGonigle wrote:
On 08/01/2011 07:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
It seems like there's SOMETHING which has to happen after
wake before NM even attempts to re-establish a connection, and that's
the longest delay, at least for me. Anyone know what that
On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 00:09 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 17:12 -0400, Bill McGonigle wrote:
On 08/01/2011 07:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
It seems like there's SOMETHING which has to happen after
wake before NM even attempts to re-establish a connection, and that's
On 08/03/2011 01:19 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
The Ubuntu NM maintainer has posted a WIP patch that makes NM say it's
connected immediately if at least one of IPv4 or IPv6 completes.
Currently if both are enabled, NM won't say it's connected until both
are done (and result in either success or
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Bill McGonigle b...@bfccomputing.com wrote:
On 08/03/2011 01:19 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
The Ubuntu NM maintainer has posted a WIP patch that makes NM say it's
connected immediately if at least one of IPv4 or IPv6 completes.
Currently if both are enabled, NM
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Nathaniel McCallum
nathan...@natemccallum.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Bill McGonigle b...@bfccomputing.com wrote:
On 08/03/2011 01:19 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
The Ubuntu NM maintainer has posted a WIP patch that makes NM say it's
connected
On 08/01/2011 07:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
It seems like there's SOMETHING which has to happen after
wake before NM even attempts to re-establish a connection, and that's
the longest delay, at least for me. Anyone know what that something is,
and whether it can be optimized?
I don't know
much additional benefit, if any, at
least on WiFi networks. It could be used on wired networks to (a)
determine which wired network you're connected to, and (b) do rapid
DHCP. Again, NM already knows what DHCP server and what lease was
last
used on the specific wifi network you just
On Sun, 2011-07-31 at 12:25 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 31.07.2011 12:17, schrieb David Woodhouse:
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 16:37 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
IIRC connman (i.e. NM's competition) can do the ARP magic, too.
I don't think so. ConnMan doesn't remember the last DHCP
wired network you're connected to, and (b) do rapid
DHCP. Again, NM already knows what DHCP server and what lease was
last
used on the specific wifi network you just connected to, and it
won't
bother doing a DISCOVER, it'll just jump to RENEW if your lease is
still
valid
On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 12:15 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
So both sides need to do some work to make things go as quickly as
possible.
Do you know if dd-wrt 'does the right thing'? It's the standard fix for
'help! I bought a consumer router!', and has a pretty responsive
maintenance team, so that
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 17:49 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
What's unique about the method described there is that the Mac
configures the interface with the same IP address it previously had if
the lease is still valid, while NetworkManager waits for the DHCP server
confirm the lease. So we could
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 17:49 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
NM already keeps DHCP information around based on the network you're
connecting to, so we don't need to ARP a bunch of servers just to
determine whether the DHCP server we wanted is still there.
That's fine on wireless, but not so useful
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 16:37 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
IIRC connman (i.e. NM's competition) can do the ARP magic, too.
I don't think so. ConnMan doesn't remember the last DHCP setup at all,
and doesn't even set the DHCP_REQUESTED_IP option — so it gets
gratuitously changed IP addresses
On 07/31/2011 12:35 AM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:30:30PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
On 07/30/2011 06:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
...
So we could presumptuously configure the interface
with the previous address from the lease and then only tear it down
if the DHCP
Am 31.07.2011 12:17, schrieb David Woodhouse:
On Sat, 2011-07-30 at 16:37 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
IIRC connman (i.e. NM's competition) can do the ARP magic, too.
I don't think so. ConnMan doesn't remember the last DHCP setup at all,
and doesn't even set the DHCP_REQUESTED_IP
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 12:35:29AM -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:30:30PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
On 07/30/2011 06:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
What's unique about the method described there is that the Mac
configures the interface with the same IP address it
of Fedora
probably not so much
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2756952
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2757785
for examples
r
-- Forwarded message --
From: Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au
Date: Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 12:51 PM
Subject: Rapid DHCP
To: OLPC Devel de
On 07/30/2011 04:48 AM, Ryan Rix wrote:
...
Reading the hackernews comments on it makes me wonder if this is a very good
idea. It may work for people in certain usecases, but in the case of Fedora
probably not so much
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2756952
On Sat, 30.07.11 10:31, Genes MailLists (li...@sapience.com) wrote:
http://cafbit.com/entry/rapid_dhcp_or_how_do
Hmm ... the complaint of changing IP does not seem to make sense - as I
read the article - the MAC simply remembers server info and instead of a
blind dhcp (which causes
On 07/30/2011 10:37 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Sat, 30.07.11 10:31, Genes MailLists (li...@sapience.com) wrote:
http://cafbit.com/entry/rapid_dhcp_or_how_do
IIRC connman (i.e. NM's competition) can do the ARP magic, too.
Lennart
Seems like a pretty reasonable thing to do -
the same method of ARPing multiple DHCP servers that Mac OS
X does, but it wouldn't provide much additional benefit, if any, at
least on WiFi networks. It could be used on wired networks to (a)
determine which wired network you're connected to, and (b) do rapid
DHCP. Again, NM already knows what DHCP
that Mac OS
X does, but it wouldn't provide much additional benefit, if any, at
least on WiFi networks. It could be used on wired networks to (a)
determine which wired network you're connected to, and (b) do rapid
DHCP. Again, NM already knows what DHCP server and what lease was last
used
On 07/30/2011 06:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
NM already keeps DHCP information around based on the network you're
connecting to, so we don't need to ARP a bunch of servers just to
determine whether the DHCP server we wanted is still there. dhclient is
Cool - so is NM already pretty
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:30:30PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
On 07/30/2011 06:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
What's unique about the method described there is that the Mac
configures the interface with the same IP address it previously had if
the lease is still valid, while NetworkManager
Interesting message in another list.
for me fedora is very slow to get dhcp address.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Sridhar Dhanapalan srid...@laptop.org.au
Date: Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 12:51 PM
Subject: Rapid DHCP
To: OLPC Devel de...@lists.laptop.org, OLPC Australia list
olpc
28 matches
Mail list logo
