On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 09:20:41AM -0500, Chuck Anderson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 08:12:24AM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > > Chuck Anderson wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 02:27:42PM +0100, Adam Tkac wrote: > >>> Crucial thing is static IPs which NM can't handle. > >> > >> False. > > > > If you bring up a mix of static and dynamically assigned interfaces, can > > you control which gets to assign the default route and DNS servers? > > The last time I looked at the code, NM had a hard-coded policy for how > it assigns the default route and DNS servers. If you only have one > interface with a default route and the other interfaces don't have a > default route, then the DNS and default route for that interface is > set. If you have more than one, I believe it picks based on the > hard-coded policy, which I believe is wired first, then wireless, then > dialup/mobile broadband. In the face of multiple wired connections, > I'm not sure what the policy is. > > Yes, NM needs to grow the ability to specify policy outside of the > code. > > It also needs IPv6 support (coming soon I hear) Unless it has been broken again, IPv6 'just works' in NM if you are using IPv6 auto-configuration. NM ensures every interface has a link local address for IPv6, so the moment any interface is up and on a network with IPv6 enabled it'll automatically get suitable addressing. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
