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

Re: starting Fedora Server SIG

Once upon a time, Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com> said:
> How is NM-dispatcher a developer service? Similarly, nm-tool is
> at least quicker than 'ip addr ls ; ip route ls ; cat /etc/resolv.conf'.

Funny; when I opened my notebook just now, hald segfaulted and died and
NM died for some unknown reason.  Because of that, nm-tool was useless,
but ifconfig still worked.

The output of nm-tool is also not particularly parseable with a script,
while ip has a good clean list.

How would a system admin even configure NM?  Where do I go to add an
alias, a new route, or a new GRE tunnel?

> As for resources... just to point out that NM (at least on my laptop)
> uses 2.5MB resident... pretty much exactly the same amount as the 5
> unused mingetty processes that many 'server' admins screamed needed to be
> kept always.

I turn off unused gettys anyway, but that's not what I'm concerned
about.  The more daemons I have to have running, the more bugs that can
break things, the more possible security issues there are, etc.

How is a daemon (or set of daemons) useful for a static configuration
that does not change?  For the vast majority of my servers, the network
config is set in the kickstart %post and not touched for the life of the
server (which is typically many years; I've got a RHEL 3 server that
hasn't had a network change since Feb 2004 for example).

For servers, the simpler solution (that meets the needs) is always
better, and running multiple daemons to configure the network is
definately not simpler than a text file and "ifup".

Chris Adams <cmadams hiwaay net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.

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