[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: NetworkManager: I want to believe, but... [was Re: F9 potential service network bug?]

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 01:04:43AM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> The pluses are that:
> - it should be able to boot up faster (note the should)

Because of delaying network initialization, or something else? I'm generally
not interested in boot time per se except in the sense of
time-to-fully-operational. (For machines with static addresses -- this isn't
the laptop case.)

> - it informs applications that you're connected to the network (say, you
> unplug the network, the router dies, or the driver for your network card
> drops you off the network)

I can see this being handy in some cases, but mostly, the network status of
statically-configured machines is generally best monitored externally.

> - and finally, it will allow routing over multiple connections in the
> future (so static wired, and wireless routed over the wired, or all the
> wired routed over a WWAN in case your internet connection breaks).

This can be done already with static configuration, but if it makes an
auto-fallback easy to configure that does seem like a plus -- but very
special purpose.

C'mon, seriously, is that all you've got? :)

The real major plus I see is: "It's good for the desktop, so doing it on
servers means it all works the same." But that's kind of a hard sell -- and
since in many cases I end up the one _making_ the sell, I'd like something
more to work with.

Matthew Miller           mattdm mattdm org          <http://mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>              <http://linux.bu.edu/>

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]