Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #175626 > unrolled thread

network setup

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  network setup Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2016-12-11 19:20 +0100
    Re: network setup Henning Follmann <hfollmann@itcfollmann.com> - 2016-12-11 20:00 +0100
    Re: network setup Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> - 2016-12-11 20:40 +0100
      Re: network setup Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-12-11 20:50 +0100
      Re: network setup Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2016-12-12 01:50 +0100
        Re: network setup Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-12-12 13:50 +0100
          Re: network setup Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2016-12-13 12:20 +0100
            Re: network setup Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-12-13 14:00 +0100
              Re: network setup Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2016-12-14 19:40 +0100
        Re: network setup Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2016-12-13 12:10 +0100
          Re: network setup Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> - 2016-12-13 15:50 +0100
        Re: network setup <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-12-13 14:20 +0100
          Re: network setup Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-12-13 14:40 +0100
            Re: network setup <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-12-13 14:50 +0100
              Re: network setup Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-12-13 20:50 +0100
                Re: network setup Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> - 2016-12-13 21:00 +0100
                  Re: network setup Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-12-13 22:10 +0100
                    Re: network setup Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> - 2016-12-14 08:50 +0100
                      Re: network setup Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2016-12-14 19:50 +0100
                  Re: network setup Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-12-13 22:10 +0100
                Re: network setup <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-12-13 22:00 +0100
                  Re: network setup David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-12-14 04:00 +0100
                    Re: network setup <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-12-14 10:20 +0100
                      Re: network setup Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 12:20 +0100
                        Re: network setup <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-12-14 12:40 +0100
                          Re: network setup Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 13:50 +0100
                    Re: network setup David Jardine <david@jardine.de> - 2016-12-14 14:10 +0100
                      Re: network setup Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-12-14 15:20 +0100
                        Re: network setup David Jardine <david@jardine.de> - 2016-12-16 01:20 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#175626 — network setup

When I used wpa_passphrase I put about 5 lines into 
/etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf which wasn't the original from the 
documentation but a new file.  The first line said network= and that was 
all.  For a wifi connection, what should go in that network= field?



--

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#175628

On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 01:13:33PM -0500, Jude DaShiell wrote:
> When I used wpa_passphrase I put about 5 lines into
> /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf which wasn't the original from the
> documentation but a new file.  The first line said network= and that was
> all.  For a wifi connection, what should go in that network= field?
> 

That starts a stanza.

Check out man wpa_supplicant.conf about the syntax of that file.

-H


-- 
Henning Follmann           | hfollmann@itcfollmann.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175629

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:13:33 -0500 (EST)
Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> wrote:

>When I used wpa_passphrase I put about 5 lines into 
>/etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf which wasn't the original from the 
>documentation but a new file.  The first line said network= and that was 
>all.  For a wifi connection, what should go in that network= field?
>
>
>
>--
>
The entries I use look like this:

network={
        ssid="The_ssid_I_want_to_use"
        psk="My_passphase_for_this_ssid"
        key_mgmt=WPA-PSK


There is no closing bracket. 
- -- 
Charlie Kravetz
Linux Registered User Number 425914
[http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM.   [http://keepingdreams.com]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEG5QK93YKrQMH22ZTiq6LjqbJ0IAFAlhNnywACgkQiq6LjqbJ
0ICJ1ggAnJIKd/n8n8oPL1JRF8y/ZhWL9nmZ5F9ZzG91++5RvUpnaH/trcGEaOie
wNTl3vqtri1HntRf84JwErD6M4lKs0dsIfP0D9wyhuQJ2CilHcZv+dviFR682Ho1
b4PyoW5fIElFAAoKN0rx0poF5STOn4H/GFjHRsJVnNgWZPzd1hS0dpuyIPR0SaN4
scg6edB2h0vfoOD3Gq0DcX/WuLU+sbhB96keuR5RMuhvKWeLsrR2lR+y+alHwEEK
GvclOw3lNJJKoyWi/zgGIYwFp1oKR+Udn0jDPpI4HXBiM/RSRuUaSABKmiJBhsNw
GOefKJ4QDCD61/jfkHwd6GiiEPrLAA==
=vfzE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175631

On Sun 11 Dec 2016 at 10:47:08 -0800, Charlie Kravetz wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:13:33 -0500 (EST)
> Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> wrote:
> 
> >When I used wpa_passphrase I put about 5 lines into 
> >/etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf which wasn't the original from the 
> >documentation but a new file.  The first line said network= and that was 
> >all.  For a wifi connection, what should go in that network= field?
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> The entries I use look like this:
> 
> network={
>         ssid="The_ssid_I_want_to_use"
>         psk="My_passphase_for_this_ssid"
>         key_mgmt=WPA-PSK
> 
> 
> There is no closing bracket. 

*You* may not have one but all the examples in wpa_supplicant.conf(5)
do.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175634

I tried manual network configuration and debian renamed wlan0 to 
wlx00c0ca364bd2 for some reason.  If I do ip a that shows up as possible 
wifi connection.  Unfortunately ifup doesn't recognize that device name.

Before this, I tried configuration with gnome and had a failure doing 
that too.  That failure is being investigated on the 
debian-accessibility list since I use orca when in graphical user 
environment.  I'm going to check out my fedora instance since that one 
works and when it did come up a component broke and got reported.  I may 
have some clues in those files.

On Sun, 11 Dec 2016, Charlie Kravetz wrote:

> Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:47:08
> From: Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: network setup
> Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 19:35:08 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:13:33 -0500 (EST)
> Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> When I used wpa_passphrase I put about 5 lines into
>> /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf which wasn't the original from the
>> documentation but a new file.  The first line said network= and that was
>> all.  For a wifi connection, what should go in that network= field?
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
> The entries I use look like this:
>
> network={
>        ssid="The_ssid_I_want_to_use"
>        psk="My_passphase_for_this_ssid"
>        key_mgmt=WPA-PSK
>
>
> There is no closing bracket.
> - --
> Charlie Kravetz
> Linux Registered User Number 425914
> [http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html]
> Never let anyone steal your DREAM.   [http://keepingdreams.com]
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEG5QK93YKrQMH22ZTiq6LjqbJ0IAFAlhNnywACgkQiq6LjqbJ
> 0ICJ1ggAnJIKd/n8n8oPL1JRF8y/ZhWL9nmZ5F9ZzG91++5RvUpnaH/trcGEaOie
> wNTl3vqtri1HntRf84JwErD6M4lKs0dsIfP0D9wyhuQJ2CilHcZv+dviFR682Ho1
> b4PyoW5fIElFAAoKN0rx0poF5STOn4H/GFjHRsJVnNgWZPzd1hS0dpuyIPR0SaN4
> scg6edB2h0vfoOD3Gq0DcX/WuLU+sbhB96keuR5RMuhvKWeLsrR2lR+y+alHwEEK
> GvclOw3lNJJKoyWi/zgGIYwFp1oKR+Udn0jDPpI4HXBiM/RSRuUaSABKmiJBhsNw
> GOefKJ4QDCD61/jfkHwd6GiiEPrLAA==
> =vfzE
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175638

On Sun 11 Dec 2016 at 19:43:06 -0500, Jude DaShiell wrote:

> I tried manual network configuration and debian renamed wlan0 to
> wlx00c0ca364bd2 for some reason.  If I do ip a that shows up as possible
> wifi connection.  Unfortunately ifup doesn't recognize that device name.

It is unclear (to me, at least) what you are trying to achieve and with
what tools. Would you please say whether you are trying to configure a
*single* wireless connection or is roaming involved?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175662

I'm trying for a single wireless connection.
I wrote some stuff in /etc/network/interfaces and wrote some things in 
/etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf and found command line 
documentation for bringing an internet connection up incomplete. 
Iwconfig has to be given the interface and told just about everything I 
put into /etc/network/interfaces but at least iwconfig preserves what I 
tell it across reboots.  When I had a graphical user interface 
environment up I used a terminal and ran nmtui with no success too, so 
I've been around the block.

On Mon, 12 Dec 2016, Brian wrote:

> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:42:01
> From: Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: network setup
> Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 12:42:18 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> 
> On Sun 11 Dec 2016 at 19:43:06 -0500, Jude DaShiell wrote:
>
>> I tried manual network configuration and debian renamed wlan0 to
>> wlx00c0ca364bd2 for some reason.  If I do ip a that shows up as possible
>> wifi connection.  Unfortunately ifup doesn't recognize that device name.
>
> It is unclear (to me, at least) what you are trying to achieve and with
> what tools. Would you please say whether you are trying to configure a
> *single* wireless connection or is roaming involved?
>
>

-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175663

If all you want is a single wireless connection which is activated when
the machine boots you do not need a wpa_supplicant.conf. Everything can
be done in /etc/network/interfaces. It is the simplest, most hassle-free
and most straightforward way to proceed.

First check that network-manager is not managing the interface you are
going to define in /e/n/i. /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf needs
to have

 [main]
 plugins=ifupdown,keyfile

 [ifupdown]
 managed=false

Also check the wireless interface name with 'ifconfig -a'. Previously
you said it was wlx00c0ca364bd2.

Now, into /etc/network/interfaces put

 allow-hotplug wlx00c0ca364bd2
 iface wlx00c0ca364bd2 inet dhcp
	wpa-ssid whatever
	wpa-psk  whatever

This is all you require in the file.

Reboot or use 'ifup -v wlx00c0ca364bd2'.


On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 06:10:16 -0500, Jude DaShiell wrote:

> I'm trying for a single wireless connection.
> I wrote some stuff in /etc/network/interfaces and wrote some things in
> /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf and found command line documentation
> for bringing an internet connection up incomplete. Iwconfig has to be given
> the interface and told just about everything I put into
> /etc/network/interfaces but at least iwconfig preserves what I tell it
> across reboots.  When I had a graphical user interface environment up I used
> a terminal and ran nmtui with no success too, so I've been around the block.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175713

Brian and others, thanks much I got network up and working last night. 
One thing I did was to turn the wpa-psk field contents into hex and 
store it that way in /etc/network/interfaces since 
/etc/network/interfaces has to be world-readable.

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Brian wrote:

> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 07:55:26
> From: Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: network setup
> Resent-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:55:43 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> 
> If all you want is a single wireless connection which is activated when
> the machine boots you do not need a wpa_supplicant.conf. Everything can
> be done in /etc/network/interfaces. It is the simplest, most hassle-free
> and most straightforward way to proceed.
>
> First check that network-manager is not managing the interface you are
> going to define in /e/n/i. /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf needs
> to have
>
> [main]
> plugins=ifupdown,keyfile
>
> [ifupdown]
> managed=false
>
> Also check the wireless interface name with 'ifconfig -a'. Previously
> you said it was wlx00c0ca364bd2.
>
> Now, into /etc/network/interfaces put
>
> allow-hotplug wlx00c0ca364bd2
> iface wlx00c0ca364bd2 inet dhcp
> 	wpa-ssid whatever
> 	wpa-psk  whatever
>
> This is all you require in the file.
>
> Reboot or use 'ifup -v wlx00c0ca364bd2'.
>
>
> On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 06:10:16 -0500, Jude DaShiell wrote:
>
>> I'm trying for a single wireless connection.
>> I wrote some stuff in /etc/network/interfaces and wrote some things in
>> /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf and found command line documentation
>> for bringing an internet connection up incomplete. Iwconfig has to be given
>> the interface and told just about everything I put into
>> /etc/network/interfaces but at least iwconfig preserves what I tell it
>> across reboots.  When I had a graphical user interface environment up I used
>> a terminal and ran nmtui with no success too, so I've been around the block.
>
>

-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175661

I can't do anything more on debian until problem with espeak 
accessibility gets fixed.  I've already sent that report to 
debian-accessibility list not running debian to do it either.  Lots of 
missing command line network documentation too.  I was making some 
progress using iwconfig and may be close except for an unassociated 
access point.  So when I run iwlist wlx00c0ca364bd2 scanning >iwlist.txt 
and the iwlist.txt has a line near the top that says address: and then 
shows a hex address, is that my access point?

On Sun, 11 Dec 2016, Jude DaShiell wrote:

> Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 19:43:06
> From: Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com>
> To: Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com>, debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: network setup
> Resent-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 00:43:25 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> 
> I tried manual network configuration and debian renamed wlan0 to 
> wlx00c0ca364bd2 for some reason.  If I do ip a that shows up as possible wifi 
> connection.  Unfortunately ifup doesn't recognize that device name.
>
> Before this, I tried configuration with gnome and had a failure doing that 
> too.  That failure is being investigated on the debian-accessibility list 
> since I use orca when in graphical user environment.  I'm going to check out 
> my fedora instance since that one works and when it did come up a component 
> broke and got reported.  I may have some clues in those files.
>
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016, Charlie Kravetz wrote:
>
>> Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:47:08
>> From: Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com>
>> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>> Subject: Re: network setup
>> Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 19:35:08 +0000 (UTC)
>> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA256
>> 
>> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:13:33 -0500 (EST)
>> Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> When I used wpa_passphrase I put about 5 lines into
>>> /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf which wasn't the original from the
>>> documentation but a new file.  The first line said network= and that was
>>> all.  For a wifi connection, what should go in that network= field?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>> The entries I use look like this:
>> 
>> network={
>>        ssid="The_ssid_I_want_to_use"
>>        psk="My_passphase_for_this_ssid"
>>        key_mgmt=WPA-PSK
>> 
>> 
>> There is no closing bracket.
>> - --
>> Charlie Kravetz
>> Linux Registered User Number 425914
>> [http://linuxcounter.net/user/425914.html]
>> Never let anyone steal your DREAM.   [http://keepingdreams.com]
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> 
>> iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEG5QK93YKrQMH22ZTiq6LjqbJ0IAFAlhNnywACgkQiq6LjqbJ
>> 0ICJ1ggAnJIKd/n8n8oPL1JRF8y/ZhWL9nmZ5F9ZzG91++5RvUpnaH/trcGEaOie
>> wNTl3vqtri1HntRf84JwErD6M4lKs0dsIfP0D9wyhuQJ2CilHcZv+dviFR682Ho1
>> b4PyoW5fIElFAAoKN0rx0poF5STOn4H/GFjHRsJVnNgWZPzd1hS0dpuyIPR0SaN4
>> scg6edB2h0vfoOD3Gq0DcX/WuLU+sbhB96keuR5RMuhvKWeLsrR2lR+y+alHwEEK
>> GvclOw3lNJJKoyWi/zgGIYwFp1oKR+Udn0jDPpI4HXBiM/RSRuUaSABKmiJBhsNw
>> GOefKJ4QDCD61/jfkHwd6GiiEPrLAA==
>> =vfzE
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> 
>
>

-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175669

That is one network access point, yes. However, where I am, I get about
10 of those, and must then read down to 
ESSID:
to find the name. Each access point grouping starts with 
Cell 0?
so by skipping to each new Cell number, I can find the next access
point to verify if it is mine.

--
Charlie Kravetz



On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:02:38 -0500 (EST)
Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> wrote:

>I can't do anything more on debian until problem with espeak 
>accessibility gets fixed.  I've already sent that report to 
>debian-accessibility list not running debian to do it either.  Lots of 
>missing command line network documentation too.  I was making some 
>progress using iwconfig and may be close except for an unassociated 
>access point.  So when I run iwlist wlx00c0ca364bd2 scanning >iwlist.txt 
>and the iwlist.txt has a line near the top that says address: and then 
>shows a hex address, is that my access point?




>
>On Sun, 11 Dec 2016, Jude DaShiell wrote:
>
>> 
>> I tried manual network configuration and debian renamed wlan0 to 
>> wlx00c0ca364bd2 for some reason.  If I do ip a that shows up as possible wifi 
>> connection.  Unfortunately ifup doesn't recognize that device name.
>>
>> Before this, I tried configuration with gnome and had a failure doing that 
>> too.  That failure is being investigated on the debian-accessibility list 
>> since I use orca when in graphical user environment.  I'm going to check out 
>> my fedora instance since that one works and when it did come up a component 
>> broke and got reported.  I may have some clues in those files.
>>
>> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016, Charlie Kravetz wrote:
>>  
>>> 
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA256
>>> 
>>> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:13:33 -0500 (EST)
>>> Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> wrote:
>>>   
>>>> When I used wpa_passphrase I put about 5 lines into
>>>> /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf which wasn't the original from the
>>>> documentation but a new file.  The first line said network= and that was
>>>> all.  For a wifi connection, what should go in that network= field?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>>   
>>> The entries I use look like this:
>>> 
>>> network={
>>>        ssid="The_ssid_I_want_to_use"
>>>        psk="My_passphase_for_this_ssid"
>>>        key_mgmt=WPA-PSK
>>> 
>>> 
>>> There is no closing bracket.
>>> - --
>>> Charlie Kravetz
>>>   
>>
>>  
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175665

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 07:43:06PM -0500, Jude DaShiell wrote:
> I tried manual network configuration and debian renamed wlan0 to
> wlx00c0ca364bd2 for some reason.

This is (somewhat ironically) called a "predictable interface name".
I don't know whether you can opt out of it under systemd: I'll leave
that for the experts (under sysvinit I still have the good old [1]
wlan0 etc. -- which I much prefer *in my context*)

[1] Yes, I know the technical advantages and the whys of those
   predictable interface names. No, in my case the engineering
   tradeoff still skews *heavily* towards "traditional" names.
   And yes, I prefer to make this choice myself.

regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlhP9RMACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYImwCeL5SPZK9IqyYKswylnpIXlcZX
3PUAmwXqizPvNt2hC7gPJLu9uz33M4VU
=nqHZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175666

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 02:18:11PM +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 07:43:06PM -0500, Jude DaShiell wrote:
>> I tried manual network configuration and debian renamed wlan0 to
>> wlx00c0ca364bd2 for some reason.
>
>This is (somewhat ironically) called a "predictable interface name".
>I don't know whether you can opt out of it under systemd: I'll leave
>that for the experts (under sysvinit I still have the good old [1]
>wlan0 etc. -- which I much prefer *in my context*)

https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/ 
lists three options:

1) Disable the renaming of interfaces by:
   # ln -s /dev/null /etc/systemd/networks/99-default.link

2) Give the interfaces your own names (such as 'internet0','dmz' etc) by 
creating a .link file in /etc/systemd/network/

3) Pass "net.ifnames=0" on the kernel command line.

>
>[1] Yes, I know the technical advantages and the whys of those
>   predictable interface names. No, in my case the engineering
>   tradeoff still skews *heavily* towards "traditional" names.
>   And yes, I prefer to make this choice myself.
>
>regards
>-- tomás

-- 
For more information, please reread.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175667

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 01:36:05PM +0000, Darac Marjal wrote:

[...]

> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/
> lists three options:

Thanks!

regards
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlhP+l8ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kY8WgCfZKs8x7VT3i2QjdopNa58SBww
u3IAnjqQfTA+hTG/uMi0lrcgEkIbgXsP
=cOJl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175683

On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 14:40:47 +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 01:36:05PM +0000, Darac Marjal wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/
> > lists three options:
> 
> Thanks!

For someone who has been using Debian for many years the position you
expound is understandable and viable to support. Someone who is used to
eth0 and wlan0 for interface names is bound to sit up and take notice
when they change to something which is strange and doesn't exactly stick
in the memory.

But remember new users; does it really matter to them? They have no
personal history to point to. As you point out, the engineering
advantages are unarguable. And after all, there are three options which
can be employed to get something you are not given. That's not bad as
things go.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175685

Le 12/13/2016 à 20:44, Brian a écrit :
> On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 14:40:47 +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 01:36:05PM +0000, Darac Marjal wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/
>>> lists three options:
>>
>> Thanks!
> 
> For someone who has been using Debian for many years the position you
> expound is understandable and viable to support. Someone who is used to
> eth0 and wlan0 for interface names is bound to sit up and take notice
> when they change to something which is strange and doesn't exactly stick
> in the memory.
> 
> But remember new users; does it really matter to them? They have no
> personal history to point to. As you point out, the engineering
> advantages are unarguable. And after all, there are three options which
> can be employed to get something you are not given. That's not bad as
> things go.
> 

Do you think eno167778 will be more useful than eth0 to a new user ?
(yes I've seen the name for the only NIC of a machine)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175687

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 09:02:45PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 20:48:46 +0100, Erwan David wrote:
> > Do you think eno167778 will be more useful than eth0 to a new user ?

> My God, why must I  use eno167778, he will say? I must change
> this to something I like. connection0 looks good.
> 
> And so he can. So where's the problem?

A new user isn't even going to see it.  As long as the Internet connection
works, why would they bother to look at the interface names?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175700

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:08:01PM CET, Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> said:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 09:02:45PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 20:48:46 +0100, Erwan David wrote:
> > > Do you think eno167778 will be more useful than eth0 to a new user ?
> 
> > My God, why must I  use eno167778, he will say? I must change
> > this to something I like. connection0 looks good.
> > 
> > And so he can. So where's the problem?
> 
> A new user isn't even going to see it.  As long as the Internet connection
> works, why would they bother to look at the interface names?

So the arguments about those names being for the new users are void. That does not help them.

-- 
Erwan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175714

A new user who does a command line installation (blind people with prior 
unix background are likely to do so) would do well to grep dmesg to find 
this stuff out.  That's how I found out about the change in device 
naming earlier but I've been using Linux since Redhat 5.0 was state of 
the art.

On Wed, 14 Dec 2016, Erwan David wrote:

> Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 02:49:24
> From: Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: network setup
> Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 07:49:43 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> 
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:08:01PM CET, Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> said:
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 09:02:45PM +0000, Brian wrote:
>>> On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 20:48:46 +0100, Erwan David wrote:
>>>> Do you think eno167778 will be more useful than eth0 to a new user ?
>>
>>> My God, why must I  use eno167778, he will say? I must change
>>> this to something I like. connection0 looks good.
>>>
>>> And so he can. So where's the problem?
>>
>> A new user isn't even going to see it.  As long as the Internet connection
>> works, why would they bother to look at the interface names?
>
> So the arguments about those names being for the new users are void. That does not help them.
>
>

-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#175688

On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 20:48:46 +0100, Erwan David wrote:

> Le 12/13/2016 à 20:44, Brian a écrit :
> > On Tue 13 Dec 2016 at 14:40:47 +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > 
> >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 01:36:05PM +0000, Darac Marjal wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/
> >>> lists three options:
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> > 
> > For someone who has been using Debian for many years the position you
> > expound is understandable and viable to support. Someone who is used to
> > eth0 and wlan0 for interface names is bound to sit up and take notice
> > when they change to something which is strange and doesn't exactly stick
> > in the memory.
> > 
> > But remember new users; does it really matter to them? They have no
> > personal history to point to. As you point out, the engineering
> > advantages are unarguable. And after all, there are three options which
> > can be employed to get something you are not given. That's not bad as
> > things go.
> > 
> 
> Do you think eno167778 will be more useful than eth0 to a new user ?
> (yes I've seen the name for the only NIC of a machine)

It is no more nor more less useful than eth0 in the sense that
networking works for them. Do you think a new user is going to
react in horror to one rather than the other?

My God, why must I  use eno167778, he will say? I must change
this to something I like. connection0 looks good.

And so he can. So where's the problem?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web