On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
We probably won't be able to do this until the next major version of NM
(0.9) since it's not nice to bump reqs in the middle of a stable release
stream. I'll keep the patch around until then though.
Ok, this obviously can
I wasn't against it per-se, but we need to really think about this since
it certainly does have the potential to make people really mad. The
reference was about some DLink routers that DoS-ed the UW Madison NTP
servers because they'd hard-coded the NTP server address in the firmware
and
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 02:15:31PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 09:43 +0200, Robert Vogelgesang wrote:
Dan,
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 05:15:54PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 22:01 +, Alessandro Bono wrote:
On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 09:25:44 -0700,
Marc Herbert wrote, On 04/15/2010 11:11 AM:
Anyway any of these solutions would typically fail to make the
difference between lack of connectivity due to a Weblogin versus
perfect connectivity to an locked-down intranet. So this is just about
*public internet connectivity*. The fuzzy and
Le 09/04/2010 01:04, Dan Williams a écrit :
It's not often that you have
more than one visible wifi network in the same area that you switch
between frequently; that would usually indicate bad network planning :)
It's not so uncommon to have several reachable networks with different
security
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 11:13 +0200, Robert Vogelgesang wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 02:15:31PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
On Fri, 2010-04-09 at 09:43 +0200, Robert Vogelgesang wrote:
Dan,
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 05:15:54PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 22:01
