OK, I checked /usr/lib/udev/rules.d/85-nm-unmanaged.rules. I extended it for my purposes (why there aren't rules by default for libvirt and docker bridges btw?) I am including updated rules file. With all this in place. (NM config file is still the same)
$ udevadm test /sys/class/net/tap0 [ -- cut -- ] ACTION=add DEVPATH=/devices/virtual/net/tap0 ID_MM_CANDIDATE=1 ID_NET_DRIVER=tun ID_NET_LINK_FILE=/usr/lib/systemd/network/99-default.link IFINDEX=6 INTERFACE=tap0 NM_UNMANAGED=1 SUBSYSTEM=net SYSTEMD_ALIAS=/sys/subsystem/net/devices/tap0 TAGS=:systemd: USEC_INITIALIZED=184623250 I see NM_UNMANAGED=1 is there. Still, when I open my vpn connection NM is running dhclient on it. Whats more interesting is that it first kills my dhclient which is run from openvpn's up script.. Whats even more interesting is that this tap0 interface ends up with 2 IPs obtained via dhcp .... Jeka On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:45 PM Dan Williams <d...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 13:30 +0000, Jetchko Jekov wrote: > > Hi, > > Here it is. > > NM will always detect all kernel interfaces and expose them through its > APIs, but it will *not* necessarily actively manage them. That is what > an "unmanaged" device means. But NM will still reflect the state of > that device through its D-Bus API.s > > In your case, it appears that NM is touching the interface in a few > cases, first for IPv6LL and second for the arping. NM probably > shouldn't be doing these things. > > Anyway, there are two mechanisms for marking devices as "unmanaged" > with NM 1.0.x and later: > > 1) NetworkManager.conf with unmanaged-devices; it appears that you have > configured this correctly so far, but Thomas would know more. > > 2) udev rules; all virtual-type interfaces should already be marked > 'unmanaged' by udev rules shipped with NetworkManager in > /usr/lib/udev/rules.d/85-nm-unmanaged.rules. You can add additional > rules by copying that file to /etc/udev/rules.d and modifying it for > your own purposes. > > Dan > > > > Jeka > > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:25 PM Thomas Haller <thal...@redhat.com> > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 21:58 +0000, Jetchko Jekov wrote: > > > > OK, I spent some time with filtering of NM log. I removed the > > > > debug > > > > lines related to WiFi connections management (they contain way > > > > too > > > > much sensitive data IMO, and are irrelevant to my problem > > > > anyway). > > > > Still the resulting file is around 280k (1,5k lines), so the > > > > question > > > > is: Is it OK to attach such "huge" file here? Or shall I gzip > > > > (bzip2/xz ) it first? > > > > > > If you compress it, it should be small enough. > > > Otherwise, you can send it to me off-list. > > > > > > Thomas > > _______________________________________________ > > networkmanager-list mailing list > > networkmanager-list@gnome.org > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list >
_______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list networkmanager-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
