F10: too many Network headaches

[Andre Costa]

Hi Marcelo,

On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 11:47, Marcelo Magno T. Sales <mmtsales at gmail.com>wrote:

> Andre,
>
> Em Dom 30 Nov 2008, Andre Costa escreveu:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just installed F10 on my system (replacing -- not upgrading -- a
> > previous F9 installation). In general, installation went by just
> > fine. However, setting up my network has been unbelievably hard.
> >
> > I have a DI-624 router, and I am using static IP (I turned its DHCP
> > server off because it was rebooting when my wife's MacBook Pro
> > connected). This setup has worked flawlessly with F9 and even F8.
> >
> > First weird symptom: NetworkManager refuses to allow me to edit
> > settings for eth0. It doesn't ask me for any kind of authentication
> > and simply shows all fields disabled. I don't know why it started
> > doing this, because right after I booted for the first time I was
> > able to edit it. Later on I disabled SELinux, don't know if this is
> > related somehow. This is specially annoying because I can't configure
> > DNS servers this way, and must always edit /etc/resolv.conf manually.
> >
> > Second weird symptom: System > Administration > Network Device
> > Control didn't show any interfaces I could manage (maybe this is the
> > correct behavior when NetworkManger is in charge, I don't know...)
> >
> > So, I turned NM off and switched back to plain system-config-network
> > (which I'd rather not do, since I need to use NetworkManager every
> > now and then to manage a GSM modem).
> >
> > To my surprise, even though I try to set my subnet mask to
> > 255.255.255.0, it was setting it to my IP address (192.168.0.100), or
> > sometimes to my gateway address (192.168.0.1). I had to manually go
> > through the files at /etc/sysconfig/network/ to fix this. Also, s-c-n
> > allowed me to create a copy of eth0 profile, but didn't allow me to
> > remove it (had to do it manually as well).
> >
> > Right now everything is working just fine I guess, but if I reenable
> > NM it screws things up again.
> >
> > AFAICS I'm probably experiencing many bugs at once (NM and s-c-n).
> > Anyone experienced anything like this? Should I start filing bug
> > reports?
>
> It seems that, for using static IP address, it's indeed better to use
> the old network daemon than NetworkManager. I had the same problem too
> and have read many, many reports of similar ones on the net.
> Regarding the system-config-network problem with the netmask, this is
> already reported in Redhat's bugzilla and a new version of system-
> config-network which solves the problem has already been push to
> updates. It's not available for download yet, but should be in the next
> few days. For now, if you want to use static addresses, you need to edit
> the /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth* files to correct the
> netmask.
>
> Thks for the info, indeed something is really broken with NM + static IP, I
just can't make it work -- and, worst of all, it screws a working eth0
configuration. It's really a pity,  because I rely on NM to manage my
non-eth0 connections, losing it will imply much more manual work. And, it
was working on F9...
But, it doesn't help to keep moaning about it (aside from the fact that it
sucks this got past QA =/ ), I'll file a bug report if one doesn't exist
already and hope this gets fixed soon.
... I just searched Bugzilla and found this one, seems to be what I am
experiencing:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473002
 <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427072>
I'll leave a comment describing my problem hoping it will help catching
attention to this problem.
Regards,
Andre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20081130/3de8ece0/attachment-0001.htm>