On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 09:28:48AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > Config for 0.7 will be much more flexible in addition to allowing > system-wide configuration. The page here explains at least the > _conceptual_ structure of how the configuration should work. Some of > the implementation details are up in the air until we figure out how > they relate to/fit in with PolicyKit, which we're looking at now. > > http://live.gnome.org/NetworkManagerConfiguration Hmmm, looks like this kind of definition is going to have a hard time working in real setups. Lemme give you some examples of what I use on a regular basis: - eth0 has a static IP in 192.44.78/24, DNS, gw, etc, and also has a static route allowing to use the interface for 192.168.87.0/24 using its static IP which is not in 192.168.* - eth0 has a static IP in 192.44.78/24, DNS, gw. eth1 has an IP in 192.168.87/24. - eth0 and eth1 have the same static IP in 192.168.87/24, eth1 has the route for 192.168.87/24, eth0 has only a route for 192.44.78/24. To that you can sometimes add another interface on another private network for iSCSI. Interfaces, addresses, routes, gateways and upper-level services (DNS, NIS...) are orthogonal for a reason. NM needs to keep this orthogonality at the lower configuration level otherwise there is no chance it will work in real-world setups. Nobody has the intellectual capacity to imagine all the possible setups that exist out there, especially when historical reasons are involved. Even on laptops you can have fun scenarios, for instance I've more than once used my laptop which was connected to an hotel's internet through ethernet as a wifi relay for my SO's laptop. So don't forget ad-hoc wifi connections, masquerading and forwarding ;-) OG. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
