Comment 1 for bug 139403

Alexander Sack (asac) wrote :

meeting log:

17:50 < asac> pitti: please rephrase :) ?
17:51 < pitti> ok, I plug my laptop into my ethernet and have auto eth0/dhcp
17:51 < asac> yeah
17:51 < pitti> (in /e/n/i)
17:51 < pitti> then I unplug it, and want to use my wifi
17:51 < pitti> but since n-m doesn't manage eth0 any more, the default route won't be torn down for eth
17:51 < pitti> (and neither the dhclient)
17:52 < pitti> i. e. everyone who every uses network-admin will be stuck there
17:52 < asac> what happens if you have two default routes?
17:52 < pitti> oh, you can switch it back to 'roaming'
17:52 < asac> for me it worked
17:52 < pitti> asac: you lose
17:52 < pitti> asac: it's a race condition, from my experience
17:52 < pitti> sometimes it works, sometimes you lose all packets
17:53 < pitti> it's bit of a corner case, yes, but so far these cases were handled pretty well because n-m actually understood
               /e/n/i
17:53 < pitti> I know, choosing between two evils :/
17:53 < asac> pitti: understood is a bit exaggerated
17:53 < asac> it broke ifupdown :)
17:54 < pitti> IOW, once someone configures "dhcp" in network-admin for eth0, n-m will just go to 'static configuration' and not
               do anything any more
17:54 < pitti> might be a bit confusing
17:54 < asac> he?
17:54 < ogra> who?
17:54 < asac> it will not go to static ... it will just stop to manage it
17:55 < pitti> asac: right, but it won't switch interfaces either because you have a manual configuration
17:55 < asac> can't dhclient listen to hal events?
17:55 < pitti> unless, of course, n-m continues to actually parse and interpret /e/n/i, but I thought you wanted to get rid of
               that
17:56 < pitti> asac: in what way?
17:56 < asac> remove/add route?
17:56 * pitti does not understand; why should dhclient do that?
17:56 < pitti> after all, dhclient *is* the bit that actually configures routes...
17:56 < asac> i don't mean dhclient .. i mean ifupdown mechanism
17:56 < ogra> asac, you could use route directly :)
17:57 < pitti> asac: there's no ifupdownd or something that could do that; what should it do?
17:57 < ogra> pitti, he wants to remove the defaultroute for that interface if i understood right
17:57 < ogra> but keep the interface as is
17:58 < pitti> asac: if we want n-m to override ifupdown routes, then we could make ifupdown use defualtroutes with metric 1
17:58 < asac> pitti: how would that look like?
17:58 < pitti> and keep n-m use metric 0 routes
17:58 < pitti> so that n-m's routes win
17:58 < asac> yes that sounds reasonable then
17:58 * asac has not idea about metrics
17:58 < pitti> asac: just "metric 1" option
17:59 < pitti> asac: just think about it as 'priority'
17:59 < asac> yeah ... were would such a feature be added?
17:59 < pitti> the lower one wins