Slashdot Mirror


NetworkManager 1.0 Released After Ten Years Development

An anonymous reader writes: After ten years of development focused on improving and simplifying Linux networking, NetworkManager 1.0 was released. NetworkManager 1.0 brings many features including an increasingly modernized client library, improved command-line support, a lightweight internal DHCP client, better Bluetooth support, VPN enhancements, WWAN IPv6 support, and other features.

10 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. NetworkManager by NotInHere · · Score: 4, Informative

    One of the few unix command line tools whose command begins with a major letter.

    1. Re:NetworkManager by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can control NetworkManager from the commandline, but most people are familiar with its GUI.

    2. Re:NetworkManager by kthreadd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Modern NetworkManager releases also include a handy tool called nmtui which is basically the GUI implemented in curses. Nmcli can sometimes be a bit unintuitive so it's a good thing to have around.

    3. Re:NetworkManager by Eric+Green · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, NetworkManager should be fine on most servers. Unless you want to use network bonding. And VLANs. And bridges. Nevermind bridged VLAN's (yes, those are a thing) on top of 802.3Ad bonds. And ... and... well, 90% of the other functionality that is offered by the Linux networking stack. NetworkManager works fine for managing the 10% of the network stack that is used 90% of the time. For the other 10% of the time, it is an abortion that should be taken out back of the barn and shot like a rabid dog. And this other 10% that NetworkManager won't do is 99% of why people pay me big bucks to make Linux do what they need it to do, since you will not get high performance networking out of a server using the limited functionality provided by NetworkManager. As in, the servers I work with generally have at least half a dozen gigabit NICs and two 10Gbit NIC's. NetworkManager won't get me 1/10th of what I need to put these servers into the midst of a large network for use in server consolidation, and is utterly useless once we start talking about Open vSwitch and other such SDN components.

      So sure, if you're a sandwich shop putting a $500 server under the cash register, or you are a teenage college student setting up a video sharing network for your bro's in the flop house you board in, NetworkManager will work fine for you. For those of us doing anything more complex, it is a useless abomination and the first thing done when bringing up a new server image is "chkconfig NetworkManager off ; service NetworkManager stop". (Or the AbominationD equivalents thereof).

      --
      Send mail here if you want to reach me.
    4. Re:NetworkManager by fisted · · Score: 3, Informative

      One of the few unix command line tools whose command begins with a major letter.

      Sorry, but there's nothing unix about NetworkManager.

    5. Re:NetworkManager by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 3, Informative

      > All you have to know about the NetworkManager abortion is that you can disable the service and remove the packag

      It's unfortunately built into most installers toolkits, so it's difficult to avoid completel, and more tools have unnecessary dependencies on it. So deleting it can lead to re-installing it

      With RHEL based sysysstems, at least, the simplest way to block it is to put "NM_CONTROLLED=no" in the "/etc/sysconfig/network. That helps ensure it stays disabled, until, and unless you specifically select it for any network port..

    6. Re:NetworkManager by WoodstockJeff · · Score: 4, Informative

      "With RHEL based sysysstems, at least, the simplest way to block it is to put "NM_CONTROLLED=no" in the "/etc/sysconfig/network. That helps ensure it stays disabled, until, and unless you specifically select it for any network port.."

      If NM is installed, even telling it to not control a network interface is insufficient to keep it from interfering with that interface. Just a week ago, I installed a new NIC in a server, configured it manually with NM told to leave it alone. 12 hours later, the server disappeared from the network. It didn't crash, it just disconnected, because NM decided to take over control of the NIC.

      Why? Because I had not put the MAC address into the configuration. Seems NM will ignore NM_CONTROLLED=no if you don't tell it the MAC address. So my fixed-IP server suddenly became a dynamic-IP workstation, with DNS pointing to the wrong network and a different gateway.

      So, no, I'm not going to leave NM installed on any machine that is NOT moving around the country using WiFi.

  2. mask NM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The most important feature is that it can be disabled, masked and unistalled without loosing functionality, as oppposed to other new TM things that I can't get rid of that easily

  3. Re:what's wrong with ifconfig? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sure, you can also do it via cli (with more tools than just those you mentioned), but, do you remember all the steps?

    Why remember them? Dump the commands into a script and just run it.

    Can you automate it?

    No, of course not, because command line tools are the absolute worst for automation. </sarcasm>

    That said, if you're dealing with wireless, I'd suggest using wicd instead of either. Less shitty than NetworkManager, less complicated than command line, and it has multiple front-ends including gtk, qt, ncurses, and CLI. I started using it years ago because NM tended to break horribly and every few updates it would lose the ability to connect to hidden APs. Meanwhile, has always "just worked" and has been completely forgettable, which is probably the best compliment that kind of software can earn.

  4. Re:what's wrong with ifconfig? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1, Informative

    On a dev system, or a server, you'll want to remove it. Bet let's not forget the desktop users :)

    And that's really the problem with Linux. It's a great server OS - but in the end, as a desktop OS it just stinks because all the developers scream when you try to "complicate" matters using tools like systemd, NetworkManager, PulseAudio which are essential to make a modern desktop OS.

    For networking you need to consider the mobile use case - home user is at home, and firewall is set up to allow services so they can stream their music and whatnot all over the network. They move their laptop to a wifi hotspot, and now the network stack should reconfigure itself to the hotspot. But oh, the firewall rules need to resync because the home user isn't at home and is in a public place, so maybe having those services exposed is a bad idea. (In an ideal world, you'd really have NetworkManager tell systemd or init to shut down those esrvices).

    That's a common scenario - user moves between trusted and untrusted networks, and something needs to detect what kind of network it is, then manage the firewall, DHCP and other things altogether.

    Perhaps if you're lucky, it's switching between Ethernet and WiFi, which means you can statically configure the whole thing, but more often than not, it's on the same interface. Or maybe it's both - a laptop user connected to a public guest network AND a private wired network. Or vice-versa. Or maybe both networks are the same.

    Ditto audio - while a server doesn't need audio, a desktop user does, and it has to handle the variety of APIs to access audio, the need to provide for multiple audio routing paths because as audio devices appear and disappear, the preferred routing may change - e.g., switch between onboard speaker+mic to Bluetooth headset for communications WHILE still playing audio (movie or music) through stereo speakers plugged into the line out jack. Then when Bluetooth disappears, mix communications audio (or mute the movie/music) if a call comes in. Audio mixing is important for multiple audio sources - perhaps you have a few YouTube video tabs open and are listening to something else - it's a PITA to stop that just to get audio for YouTube because it needs to release the audio device.

    It's amazing how, despite Linux being an advanced multi-tasking OS, a lot of things are still stuck in the single-tasking world that developers think is all you need. Maybe a decade ago, but modern day PCs are so much more capable.