DSL under Wireless

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Hello all,

First of all, thank you guys for the great software, NetworkManager.
The only problem that I have with it is DSL connection. As all of us know, today many DSL modems are equipped with Wifi which is much better than ethernet. But it seems that NetworkManager doesn't support DSL under wifi. My question is that why NetworkManager does categorize DSL just under wired connecions? Why it doesn't provide a separate menu for DSL connections like VPN connection? Is it better that the type of permanent connection doesn't matter to DSL?

Cheers,
Habib

_______________________________________________
NetworkManager-list mailing list
NetworkManager-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list

[Dan Williams]

On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 09:05 -0700, Habib Seifzadeh wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> First of all, thank you guys for the great software, NetworkManager.
> The only problem that I have with it is DSL connection. As all of us
> know, today many DSL modems are equipped with Wifi which is much
> better than ethernet. But it seems that NetworkManager doesn't support
> DSL under wifi. My question is that why NetworkManager does categorize
> DSL just under wired connecions? Why it doesn't provide a separate
> menu for DSL connections like VPN connection? Is it better that the
> type of permanent connection doesn't matter to DSL?

Right now NM doesn't allow PPPoE over arbitrary interfaces, which was a
design oversight when PPPoE got added.  That's not hard to fix, it just
needs to be done.  When that gets done, we'll also add the ability to
keep the local subnet IP address on eth0/wlan0 as well, which is often
requested.

PPPoE is more like a VPN than an actual connection method in that it
creates a virtual tunnel interface on top of an actual physical
interface.

Dan



_______________________________________________
NetworkManager-list mailing list
NetworkManager-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list

> >

> > First of all, thank you guys for the great software, NetworkManager.
> > The only problem that I have with it is DSL connection. As all of us
> > know, today many DSL modems are equipped with Wifi which is much
> > better than ethernet. But it seems that NetworkManager doesn't support
> > DSL under wifi. My question is that why NetworkManager does categorize
> > DSL just under wired connecions? Why it doesn't provide a separate
> > menu for DSL connections like VPN connection? Is it better that the
> > type of permanent connection doesn't matter to DSL?
>
> Right now NM doesn't allow PPPoE over arbitrary interfaces, which was a
> design oversight when PPPoE got added.  That's not hard to fix, it just
> needs to be done.  When that gets done, we'll also add the ability to
> keep the local subnet IP address on eth0/wlan0 as well, which is often
> requested.
>
> PPPoE is more like a VPN than an actual connection method in that it
> creates a virtual tunnel interface on top of an actual physical
> interface.
>
> Dan

Dear Dan and other friends,

Have supporting of PPPoE over arbitrary interfaces been implemented? Can I update the NM code by myself? Which module must I update?

Alternatively, if the NM doesn't gray out wired connections even if no wire is connected, the problem may be solved, I think. Is there any way to do so?

Thanks a lot,
Habib



     
_______________________________________________
NetworkManager-list mailing list
NetworkManager-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list

[Dan Williams]

On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 14:47 -0700, Habib Seifzadeh wrote:

> > >
>
> > > First of all, thank you guys for the great software, NetworkManager.
> > > The only problem that I have with it is DSL connection. As all of us
> > > know, today many DSL modems are equipped with Wifi which is much
> > > better than ethernet. But it seems that NetworkManager doesn't support
> > > DSL under wifi. My question is that why NetworkManager does categorize
> > > DSL just under wired connecions? Why it doesn't provide a separate
> > > menu for DSL connections like VPN connection? Is it better that the
> > > type of permanent connection doesn't matter to DSL?
> >
> > Right now NM doesn't allow PPPoE over arbitrary interfaces, which was a
> > design oversight when PPPoE got added.  That's not hard to fix, it just
> > needs to be done.  When that gets done, we'll also add the ability to
> > keep the local subnet IP address on eth0/wlan0 as well, which is often
> > requested.
> >
> > PPPoE is more like a VPN than an actual connection method in that it
> > creates a virtual tunnel interface on top of an actual physical
> > interface.
> >
> > Dan
>
> Dear Dan and other friends,
>
> Have supporting of PPPoE over arbitrary interfaces been implemented? Can I update the NM code by myself? Which module must I update?

Would be great if you wanted to poke at this and try to get some patches
for it.  I'd be happy to help guide you through what I think would be
necessary.

There are a couple of parts to this.  First, we need to remove the "DSL"
page from the connection editor, and instead add a "PPPoE" page to each
connection editor window with a checkbox that says "use PPPoE on this
connection" much like the 802.1x tab for wired connections.  The same
thing would get added to Wireless connections.

Inside NM, we need to make the PPPoE handling code more generic.  It's
currently only implemented for wired devices in
src/nm-device-ethernet.c, but we could split that out into common code
in src/ppp-manager/ somewhere that both the NMDeviceEthernet and
NMDeviceWifi objects can use inside NM.

Then there's the question of what stage the PPPoE connection should run
at.  Each NMDevice object (of which Ethernet and Wifi are subclasses)
proceed from the DISCONNECTED state through a few others like IP_CONFIG
and such to the ACTIVATED state.  We still want to bring up the
underlying device's IP config, and *then* bring up the PPPoE
connection's IP config after that.  The internal structure of NM is such
that it's geared towards only one IP config at the moment, which is why
we currently don't try to set up the ethernet device's IP stuff, but
instead do PPPoE.

I'm not quite sure how to go about putting in the PPPoE stages and
applying the config since we don't want to call the device "ready" until
*both* the underlying IP config *and* the PPPoE config are up.  In that
way PPPoE is more like a VPN, but we can also run the VPN on top of the
PPPoE...

One thought would be to do both the PPPoE and the eth/wifi bringup in
parallel with a waterfall approach where each device stage isn't
complete until *both* the eth/wifi and PPPoE bits for that stage were
done.  I guess that's the easiest approach.

Sound interesting to do?  I can outline my thoughts for that.

Dan


_______________________________________________
NetworkManager-list mailing list
NetworkManager-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list

----- Original Message ----

> From: Dan Williams <dcbw@...>
> To: Habib Seifzadeh <habibseifzadeh@...>
> Cc: networkmanager-list@...
> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 3:39:26 AM
> Subject: Re: DSL under Wireless
>
> On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 14:47 -0700, Habib Seifzadeh wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > > > First of all, thank you guys for the great software, NetworkManager.
> > > > The only problem that I have with it is DSL connection. As all of us
> > > > know, today many DSL modems are equipped with Wifi which is much
> > > > better than ethernet. But it seems that NetworkManager doesn't support
> > > > DSL under wifi. My question is that why NetworkManager does categorize
> > > > DSL just under wired connecions? Why it doesn't provide a separate
> > > > menu for DSL connections like VPN connection? Is it better that the
> > > > type of permanent connection doesn't matter to DSL?
> > >
> > > Right now NM doesn't allow PPPoE over arbitrary interfaces, which was a
> > > design oversight when PPPoE got added.  That's not hard to fix, it just
> > > needs to be done.  When that gets done, we'll also add the ability to
> > > keep the local subnet IP address on eth0/wlan0 as well, which is often
> > > requested.
> > >
> > > PPPoE is more like a VPN than an actual connection method in that it
> > > creates a virtual tunnel interface on top of an actual physical
> > > interface.
> > >
> > > Dan
> >
> > Dear Dan and other friends,
> >
> > Have supporting of PPPoE over arbitrary interfaces been implemented? Can I
> update the NM code by myself? Which module must I update?
>
> Would be great if you wanted to poke at this and try to get some patches
> for it.  I'd be happy to help guide you through what I think would be
> necessary.
>
> There are a couple of parts to this.  First, we need to remove the "DSL"
> page from the connection editor, and instead add a "PPPoE" page to each
> connection editor window with a checkbox that says "use PPPoE on this
> connection" much like the 802.1x tab for wired connections.  The same
> thing would get added to Wireless connections.

I think the GUI code is in the nm-applet while the other codes is in the nm itself. So, we should change the nm-applet code for adding the PPPoE tab in all connection editor windows. Is it the case?

>
> Inside NM, we need to make the PPPoE handling code more generic.  It's
> currently only implemented for wired devices in
> src/nm-device-ethernet.c, but we could split that out into common code
> in src/ppp-manager/ somewhere that both the NMDeviceEthernet and
> NMDeviceWifi objects can use inside NM.

I saw the nm-device-ethernet.c code. The function names are self-documented. There are some variables which are related to PPPoE. I think I should skim the file much more to be able to split the PPPoE related code to another file. Any help in this area will be appreciated...

>
> Then there's the question of what stage the PPPoE connection should run
> at.  Each NMDevice object (of which Ethernet and Wifi are subclasses)
> proceed from the DISCONNECTED state through a few others like IP_CONFIG
> and such to the ACTIVATED state.  We still want to bring up the
> underlying device's IP config, and *then* bring up the PPPoE
> connection's IP config after that.  The internal structure of NM is such
> that it's geared towards only one IP config at the moment, which is why
> we currently don't try to set up the ethernet device's IP stuff, but
> instead do PPPoE.
>
> I'm not quite sure how to go about putting in the PPPoE stages and
> applying the config since we don't want to call the device "ready" until
> *both* the underlying IP config *and* the PPPoE config are up.  In that
> way PPPoE is more like a VPN, but we can also run the VPN on top of the
> PPPoE...
>
> One thought would be to do both the PPPoE and the eth/wifi bringup in
> parallel with a waterfall approach where each device stage isn't
> complete until *both* the eth/wifi and PPPoE bits for that stage were
> done.  I guess that's the easiest approach.

I realized that a feature that can activate more than one connection at a moment has been recently added to nm. Can it help us to have separate DSL window (like now) and activate both the permanent connection and DSL connection at the same time?

Cheers,
Habib


     
_______________________________________________
NetworkManager-list mailing list
NetworkManager-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list

[Graham Beneke-3]

Dan Williams wrote:
> Then there's the question of what stage the PPPoE connection should run
> at.  Each NMDevice object (of which Ethernet and Wifi are subclasses)
> proceed from the DISCONNECTED state through a few others like IP_CONFIG
> and such to the ACTIVATED state.  We still want to bring up the
> underlying device's IP config, and *then* bring up the PPPoE
> connection's IP config after that.  The internal structure of NM is such
> that it's geared towards only one IP config at the moment, which is why
> we currently don't try to set up the ethernet device's IP stuff, but
> instead do PPPoE.

Surely you do not want to attempt to bring up an IP interface before
setting up a PPPoE connection? Most services providing PPPoE won't have
DHCP server responding on the same ethernet segment.

Perhaps the PPPoE config is better located on the 'IPv4 Settings' tab as
one of the possible 'Method's?
_______________________________________________
NetworkManager-list mailing list
NetworkManager-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list

[Dan Williams]

On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 11:31 +0200, Graham Beneke wrote:

> Dan Williams wrote:
> > Then there's the question of what stage the PPPoE connection should run
> > at.  Each NMDevice object (of which Ethernet and Wifi are subclasses)
> > proceed from the DISCONNECTED state through a few others like IP_CONFIG
> > and such to the ACTIVATED state.  We still want to bring up the
> > underlying device's IP config, and *then* bring up the PPPoE
> > connection's IP config after that.  The internal structure of NM is such
> > that it's geared towards only one IP config at the moment, which is why
> > we currently don't try to set up the ethernet device's IP stuff, but
> > instead do PPPoE.
>
> Surely you do not want to attempt to bring up an IP interface before
> setting up a PPPoE connection? Most services providing PPPoE won't have
> DHCP server responding on the same ethernet segment.
>
> Perhaps the PPPoE config is better located on the 'IPv4 Settings' tab as
> one of the possible 'Method's?

We've had multiple requests to allow local network access when also
using PPPoE.  Originally we thought they were mutually exclusive, but it
turns out that's apparently not the case...

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=559134

Dan


_______________________________________________
NetworkManager-list mailing list
NetworkManager-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list