Re: System-Wide 802.1x configuration?
- From: Thomas Haller <thaller redhat com>
- To: Jonas Bygdén <jbygden gmail com>, networkmanager-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: System-Wide 802.1x configuration?
- Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2022 10:02:51 +0100
Hi,
On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 14:20 +0100, Jonas Bygdén via networkmanager-list
wrote:
Today we configure our Linux clients to use wired 802.1x on the on-
board ethernet interface in the laptops they get.
If I understand you correctly, you pre-configure machines for others
(like students or employees).
Some users choose to connect their laptop to a monitor using USB-C,
and then using the ethernet interface that's built-in to the monitor.
This changes the interface/connection and hence it doesn't have the
pre-configured 802.1x, requiring a new configuration of 802.1x for
that interface as well.
So, my question is: Is it possible to configure 802.1x for all
connections at once, globally "system wide", instead of on a "per
connection" basis? Making the 802.1x configuration work regardless of
which interface/connection is used to connect to the (wired) network?
What would mean "globally system-wide"? You need configuration for
configuring a network interface. That configuration is the connection
profile. And since there are profiles, there is no need to have a
concept for "global system-wide" configuration. Just create/predeploy
such a profile yourself.
a connection profile "matches" on a device based on certain properties.
For example, if you have an ethernet profile that does not specify
"connection.interface-name", then it would apply to any ethernet device
(unless it's restricted via some other property, like "ethernet.mac-
address", "match.*"). It would sound, that you want that your profile
is applicable to any device.
Usually, a profile can only be activated once at any given moment. You
could instead configure "connection.multi-connect=multiple", to
activate on multiple devices at the same time. However, that might not
make sense for your usecase and is probably not a good idea (because
it's confusing).
best,
Thomas
[Date Prev][
Date Next] [Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]