Hi,
On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 08:33 -0800, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> this does not look like an useful interface. I find it actually pretty
> ugly and glued on. It does not fit. So lets not do it this way.
Yes, all attributes you mentioned describes it well. Martin wanted to
see the code, so it was better to send it here early as an RFC.
> If we wanted to do this, then this should be done as part of the
> Technology interface and not some crazy attempt to have a global entry
> point.
Unfortunately I had to glue it somewhere until I figure out a reliable
way of detecting which device is of what type. At that point it can be
expressed as a Technology property. But for now even the BT part needs
verifying, the device is attached to the bridge for sure, but which MAC
address we're seeing is yet to be verified.
> I do not even know what any of these information mean. What are they
> good for. What value are they providing. What would the user interface
> do with this information?
The idea here is to provide a list of the clients that are tethered.
Some additional information about each one is useful to have. We're not
removing anyone at will, though.
(Even I would prefer to have live information on the leases, it is not
fun to dig through a stale udhcp server lease file to find that headless
box when away from home.)
Cheers,
Patrik
_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
connman@connman.net
http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman
