Dan Williams a écrit :
> if NM is not managing your default internet connection, then you
> should probably turn NM off when setting up the machine.
This "take it or leave it" philosophy is quite disappointing.
> But the core problem is that network management is a *system-wide*
> problem, and
2009/5/1 Dan Williams
> On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 20:23 +0100, Andrew Bird (Sphere Systems) wrote:
> > Hi Pablo,
> > Speaking as a developer of VMC, I find NM's position of being the
> well known
> > place for applications to find out if they have network connectivity
> logical,
> > but also fr
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 05:25:27PM +0100, Marc Herbert wrote:
> 3) NM could simply lean towards the optimistic side and report
> connectivity as soon as in doubt. Maybe NM should trigger off-line modes
> ONLY when it is 200% sure that it OWNS EVERY single interface in the
> system and is positively
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 20:23 +0100, Andrew Bird (Sphere Systems) wrote:
> Hi Pablo,
> Speaking as a developer of VMC, I find NM's position of being the well
> known
> place for applications to find out if they have network connectivity logical,
> but also frustrating. Not providing an inter
Hi Pablo,
Speaking as a developer of VMC, I find NM's position of being the well
known
place for applications to find out if they have network connectivity logical,
but also frustrating. Not providing an interface for 3rd party connection
managers to publish their status means we have t
2009/4/30 Dan Williams
> On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 14:06 +0100, Marc Herbert wrote:
> > David Sundqvist a écrit :
> >
> > > If I set it to be managed by NM, will NM try to manage it in any way?
> > > Can I set it to be seen, but still unmanaged? Or maybe I could get NM
> > > to always output a connec
Quoting Marc Herbert :
For instance this most obvious false positive: you are connected but not
to the internet. Then why would pidgin try to reach MSN servers in this
case?
There's also the granularity issue; one can't expect NM to determine
what ports are blocked by firewalls, proxied, etc
For instance this most obvious false positive: you are connected but not
to the internet. Then why would pidgin try to reach MSN servers in this
case?
post from two days ago.
http://www.nabble.com/-WISH--Make-NM-autodetect-if-it-can-reach-the-internet-td23286488.html
Currently, its seems to be t
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 17:17 +0200, David Sundqvist wrote:
> Quoting Marc Herbert :
> > There seems to be something fundamentally wrong in this no-connection/
> > /offline thing. Since NM can be configured to manage _not all_
> > interfaces (including none at all) then why are some applications
> >
David Sundqvist a écrit :
> Perhaps. Taking a quick look at the NM project webpage, it's not
> really that farfetched: "Using the awesome power and flexibility of
> dbus and hal, NetworkManager provides facilities for other
> applications like browsers, email clients, or system services to b
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 14:06 +0100, Marc Herbert wrote:
> David Sundqvist a écrit :
>
> > If I set it to be managed by NM, will NM try to manage it in any way?
> > Can I set it to be seen, but still unmanaged? Or maybe I could get NM
> > to always output a connected status instead of a no-conne
Quoting Marc Herbert :
There seems to be something fundamentally wrong in this no-connection/
/offline thing. Since NM can be configured to manage _not all_
interfaces (including none at all) then why are some applications
wrongly assuming NM is always managing the entire network
configuration? T
2009/4/30 Marc Herbert
> David Sundqvist a écrit :
>
> > If I set it to be managed by NM, will NM try to manage it in any way?
> > Can I set it to be seen, but still unmanaged? Or maybe I could get NM
> > to always output a connected status instead of a no-connection which
> > triggers firefox of
David Sundqvist a écrit :
> If I set it to be managed by NM, will NM try to manage it in any way?
> Can I set it to be seen, but still unmanaged? Or maybe I could get NM
> to always output a connected status instead of a no-connection which
> triggers firefox offline mode, etc. (should the c
On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 23:36 +0200, David Sundqvist wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking for some suggestions as to how to configure Network
> Manager appropriately and safely for clients booting off PXE with
> iSCSI root.
>
> The clients are Fedora 10 with NM 0.7.0.99.
>
> Currently the network conn
Hi,
I'm looking for some suggestions as to how to configure Network
Manager appropriately and safely for clients booting off PXE with
iSCSI root.
The clients are Fedora 10 with NM 0.7.0.99.
Currently the network connection is unmanaged by NM, but as desktop
programs start using NM, it wo
16 matches
Mail list logo
