Re: NM using Option card
- From: Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>
- To: Stefan Seyfried <seife suse de>
- Cc: networkmanager-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: NM using Option card
- Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:08:03 -0500
On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 17:03 +0100, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 09:54:28AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
> > We've been talking to the VMC developers, who have added a D-Bus
> > interface to VMC. You're right, it's pointless to have many projects
> > duplicate the same quirks and workarounds for cards, and using some
> > existing tool is the way to go. Since VMC is adding the D-Bus
> > interface, Tambet and I thought that using VMC like we currently use
> > wpa_supplicant would be a good option.
>
> Did you ever look at VMC? IMHO it is much too heavyweight to be a backend
> for a system daemon like NM. And it supported almost no hardware the last
> time i looked (a few weeks ago).
They were separating it into a backend and a front-end GUI client as far
as I know. Their GUI frontend would do stuff like SMS and address book
manipulation and communicate with the backend via D-Bus, like NM would
do.
Dan
> > > The 10.64.64.64 default peer address is also no problem - the network just
> > > does not return a peer address, so pppd uses this default. It does not matter,
> > > as long as your default route points to the ppp interface, it just works.
> > > At least for me, with a quite some hardware and providers that have tested.
> >
> > Not really; I needed a valid peer address for Sprint here in the US
> > otherwise my packets would go nowhere. Previously, the NM
> > implementation would just assign the local address as the peer address,
> > and that simply didn't work. I can't imagine how assigning the random
> > 10.64.64.6x address would work any better?
>
> If the peer does not supply a peer address it will basically go like
>
> route add default dev ppp0
>
> As long as the other end takes all traffic and routes it, you don't
> need a default gateway set up on your machine.
>
> root susi:~# ifconfig modemB
> modemB Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol
> inet addr:10.129.77.52 P-t-P:10.64.64.64 Mask:255.255.255.255
> UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> RX packets:4 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> TX packets:7 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> collisions:0 txqueuelen:3
> RX bytes:58 (58.0 b) TX bytes:327 (327.0 b)
>
> root susi:~# route -n
> Kernel IP routing table
> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
> 10.64.64.64 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 modemB
> 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo
> 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 modemB
>
> and it works just fine. (Yes, ifconfig and route are lame and real men use ip
> for that today... :-)
>
> This does not mean that this will work for all configurations, but for those
> i encountered here in europe, it worked just fine.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]