On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:37:32PM +0200, Gerhard Roth wrote: > I have this stuff around quite a while now, but since patrick@ asked > me repeatedly, I think it is time to share this now. > > This is a patch that adds support for the "Mobile Broadband Interface > Model" (MBIM) from http://www.usb.org/. It allows to attach UMTS/LTE > USB devices as a network interface. > > I'm not asking for OKs at this time, but hope that some people will > give it test. I tested with two different Sierra Wireless modules > (EM8805, MC8305) and each one behaved a little bit different. > > In order to configure the network interface, this is what you do: > > # ifconfig mbim0 pin 1234 apn internet.t-mobile > # ifconfig mbim0 inet 0.0.0.1 0.0.0.2 > # route delete default > # route add -ifp mbim0 default 0.0.0.2 > # ifconfig mbim0 up > > The mbim interface is a point-to-point type interface and will > update the default route, once it is registered in the network.
As others have already said, I think the problem with these diffs is that you're trying to solve too many problems at once. I believe the problems this driver should solve first and foremost are getting a network link and getting an IP assigned to the interface so people can use that IP to set up whatever routing they want. Could mbim in theory support IPv6? We don't need to do anything about this now. But the design shouldn't assume it will only support IPv4. Don't worry about breaking existing umsm(4) setups. Since this driver provides a much simpler user interface than umsm coupled with pppd(8) I'd suggest to eventually prefer attaching mbim instead of umsm where possible. I hate having to copy pppd config files around for umsm. If I lost those files I'd have to spend a day or so to get the setup working again because I don't remember (and don't want to remember) all the AT and up/down scripts I used to get umsm to work. That's why I think mbim is promising. > To get extended information on the interface use: > > # ifconfig mbim0 devinfo I don't see the need to add a new subcommand for this. If this information is important why is it not shown as part of the default 'ifconfig mbim0' output? If it is not important, why show it? I agree with Theo that the ifconfig diff is too large. And it seems you're exposing too many details at this layer. How much of it can be removed while still solving the problem of getting a network link and an IP assigned? Can you compress status information on the 'status:' line, instead of printing seperate lines for data items such as pin, error state, rssi, ber and so on? How much of this information do users really need?
