F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web

[Dan Williams]

On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 10:05 +0000, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 09:55 +0000, Terry Barnaby wrote:
> > On 11/29/2009 11:30 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 09:10 +0000, Terry Barnaby wrote:
> > >> On 11/28/2009 08:35 AM, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> > >>> 2009/11/28 Terry Barnaby wrote:
> > >>>> If the NetworkManager service is running, but not managing the current
> > >>>> network connection, then Firefox starts up in offline mode.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Is this a bug in NetworkManager or Firefox ?
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> This is odd behaviour and needs to be fixed. I would suggest open up a
> > >>> bug against firefox. I know one can change
> > >>> toolkit.networkmanager.disable preference, but it is a PITA for our
> > >>> users. One of use cases is: Sometime network manager does not connect
> > >>> me via my CDMA usb modem (in case signal is weak), but wvdial does and
> > >>> once I switch from NM to wvdial, my firefox gets to offline mode,
> > >>> which I don't expect it to as I am connected.
> > >>>
> > >> Ok, filed as: 542078
> > >
> > > NetworkManager is intended to control the default internet connection.
> > > If NetworkManager cannot control the default internet connection, then
> > > you may not want to use NetworkManager.
> > >
> > > In your case, you're using a mobile broadband device.  The real bug here
> > > is that for whatever reason, NM/MM aren't connecting your modem, and we
> > > should follow up on that bug instead.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > I am not using a mobile broadband device. The network connection my systems
> > use is not just the Internet it is a local network LAN connection that also
> > serves the internet. Most of my systems use a local network server which 
> > provides NIS, /home and /data using NFS and VPN etc. I normally use the
> > service "network" to bring up wired or wireless networking for this. Fedora,
> > by default, uses NetworkManager to manage all network devices though. I use
> > the service "network" as, for some reason, the NetworkManager service is
> > started after the netfs and other services are started. Is there a reason
> > for this ??
> > 
> > I can obviously turn of the NetworkManager service, which I have done on the
> > desktop systems. However, I also have a few Laptops that can roam. In F11 and
> > before I have used the network and NetworkManager services. When the laptop
> > boots away from home, the "network" service fails and I can then use the
> > NetworkManager service to connect to whatever wireless network or G3 network is
> > available.
> > 
> > It does seem sensible to me that the "system" provides applications with info
> > on if the network is up (not just the Internet). The NetworkManager service
> > seems the place to do this and it looks like the applications are starting
> > to use it for this purpose.
> > So maybe a generic NM "isNetworkUp()" API call is called for ?
> > 
> 
> I think the NetworkManager issue is a confusion between control and
> monitoring. I've mentioned this before in another context, but there
> seems to be no reason why these two things should be considered the
> same. Just because NetworkManager isn't controlling a device doesn't
> mean that it shouldn't monitor the up/down state of the device and
> update the applications' idea of the network being up/down accordingly,

NetworkManager provides a consistent API for applications to use to
interogate the networking situation of the machine.  This includes a
consistent configuration mechanism and information about the connections
in-use, including a nice "human name".  It includes a per-connection
identifier that applications can (and do!) use to perform specific
operations when connection state changes.  Part of the problem is that
if these aren't provided, you loose quite a lot of functionality and
usefulness.

You can't match up current network config with specific configuration
information stored on-disk because there's nothing keeping track of
what's happening on the system.

It's a lot harder to, say, have Evolution only check your mail when your
VPN is up.

There's no tracking of connection dependencies so that if say your
mobile broadband device goes down and you've got a VPN up, the VPN stays
up and just hangs.  Or tie VPN and other connections together so that
they come up and go down at the same time.

There's no consistent tracking of connection time and data usage which
NM will soon be doing.

That's just the start.  I'd assert that good, useful monitoring
*requires* a lot of information that only the controller knows.  The
problem is that in the old system, there was no controller; ifup/ifdown
are basically like terrorist cells upon pain of death have almost no
knowledge of anything else on the system.  Which is why NM attempts to
tie a lot of that together in one central location, including
configuration, control, and monitoring.  Yes, it's harder for experts to
create a world-dominating robot with duct tape and bailing wire because
most of the parts are already assembled, but for most people it provides
a ready-to-use solution with great integration possibilities into your
system environment.

Dan