On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 05:25:17AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Matthew Miller wrote: > > When there's a compelling use case for NetworkManager on machines that > > don't move around? > > The "compelling use case" is that it doesn't make sense to maintain 2 pieces > of core infrastructure code doing the same thing, especially when one's > functionality is a subset of the other's. (Now the problem is that it still > isn't, which I hadn't been aware of before this discussion, hopefully the > missing stuff like bridging will get added to NM soon, and hopefully there > won't be another missing piece "everyone" will be complaining about (before, > it was systemwide settings, static IPs and IPv6, those are all implemented > now AFAIK).) Does it support setting "ip rule" commands if an interface is up? http://projects.gnome.org/NetworkManager/developers/settings-spec-08.html Did not show this. And it seems not to be able to create tun or tap devices, which requires only a small ifup-tun script with the old system. > And FWIW, strictly speaking, there's a compelling use case for NM on a > machine that doesn't move around: If the network plug is in another room and > you don't want to extend a 20m cable through 2+ doors, you have to use > wireless networking. If you want to use something secure, you cannot rely on > unencrypted wireless or WEP, you have to use WPA (or WPA2) with AES/CCMP > (warning: TKIP is also insecure!). But the old network service does not > support WPA. You either have to apply an unofficial patch (which was never With the old network service it was still possible to manually use iwconfig and wpa-supplicant and therefore WPA. Or to create a OpenVPN tunnel, which I would prefer more than using WPA in terms of security. But with NetworkManager running, the command line tools usually do not work as expected. Regards Till
Attachment:
pgpVzjQbugGlP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
