F10: too many Network headaches

[Andre Costa]

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?

Regards,

Andre

[Marcelo Magno T. Sales]

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.

[]'s
Marcelo

[lanas]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 10:47:25 -0300,
"Marcelo Magno T. Sales"  wrote :
> 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.

That's good to know.  I'm using the company's DHCP now but might
allocate a static IP.

What's the good of a new manager if it doesn't do all aspects of the
job right ?  There's enough managers out there whose focus are
about their 3-door garage homes instead of their work.  That one might
not have a 3-door garage home, but what's the use of putting it in the
job's seat if he can't do it all ?  Ridiculous.  Send it back to studies
and offline practice and we'll see in a couple of years.  If nobody
else shows up, that is ;-)

Cheers.

[Tom Horsley]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 11:43:31 -0500
lanas  wrote:
> What's the good of a new manager if it doesn't do all aspects of the
> job right ?

Yea, I never understood where the insane desire to rewrite everything
from scratch came from (making it incompatible in the process).

If I were doing it, I would have left the existing network service
in change and put a layer on top of it that could stop the network,
swap in new definitions, and start it up again. 100% backward compatible
because the core implementation didn't change, and if you aren't
flitting about from hot spot to hot spot, nothing at all changes.

[Frank Cox]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 11:43:31 -0500
lanas  wrote:
> What's the good of a new manager if it doesn't do all aspects of the
> job right ?

Because it does a very good job for the stuff that's it's currently intended to
do.

I use NM on my laptops and the old-style network service for my desktop
computers that have static addresses and never move.  My DNS server provides
static addresses to my laptops when they are connected locally, and when they
are "out and about" then NM provides whatever addresses are required at their
current location.

Everything works just dandy for me that way.

I like NM a lot.  For laptops.  I don't see any point in trying to use it on a
desktop, though.  Set a static address and call it done.

[Andre Costa]

Hi Marcelo,

On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 11:47, Marcelo Magno T. Sales 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

[Richard England]

Andre Costa wrote:
> Hi Marcelo,
>
> On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 11:47, Marcelo Magno T. Sales 
> <[e-mail] > 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 <http://255.255.255.0>, it was setting it to my IP
> address (192.168.0.100 <http://192.168.0.100>), or
> > sometimes to my gateway address (192.168.0.1
> <http://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
> I'll leave a comment describing my problem hoping it will help 
> catching attention to this problem.
> Regards,
> Andre

Did you all stop and disable the NetworkManager service before you 
enabled and started to try configure the network settings in the older 
manner?

chkconfig --level 012345 NetworkManger off

[Wolfgang S. Rupprecht]

"Andre Costa"  writes:
> To my surprise, even though I try to set my subnet mask to
> [1]255.255.255.0, it was setting it to my IP address ([2]192.168.0.100),
> or sometimes to my gateway address ([3]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).

system-config-network refused to let me set the subnet mask and bcast
address correctly.  I tried several times and even exited and
restarted.  I finally just emacs-ed
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 and then did a service
restart networking.  I'm not sure what was up with
system-config-networking messing up the netmask like that.

-wolfgang

[Mike Chambers]

On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 15:25 -0800, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote:
> system-config-network refused to let me set the subnet mask and bcast
> address correctly.  I tried several times and even exited and
> restarted.  I finally just emacs-ed
> /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 and then did a service
> restart networking.  I'm not sure what was up with
> system-config-networking messing up the netmask like that.

If problems (for you and others), there is always
system-config-network-tui and it *just works* and doesn't (least, I
don't think so) mess anything up that I can see.

[Phil Meyer]

Andre Costa wrote:
> ...
>
> 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.

One F10 system installed recently needed a fixed IP, so I gave it one 
during the install.
NetworkManager works just fine in this case.

Here is a /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 that works:

# Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme II BCM5708S Gigabit Ethernet
# Faked to protect the inno^H^H^H^H company
DEVICE=eth0
BOOTPROTO=static
BROADCAST=10.1.49.255
DNS1=10.1.10.41
DNS2=10.1.10.42
GATEWAY=10.1.49.1
HWADDR=00:17:a4:77:BB:14
IPADDR=10.1.49.205
NETMASK=255.255.255.0
ONBOOT=yes
DOMAIN="mydomain.com"

[Jim]

Phil Meyer wrote:
> Andre Costa wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > 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.
>
> One F10 system installed recently needed a fixed IP, so I gave it one 
> during the install.
> NetworkManager works just fine in this case.
>
> Here is a /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 that works:
>
> # Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme II BCM5708S Gigabit Ethernet
> # Faked to protect the inno^H^H^H^H company
> DEVICE=eth0
> BOOTPROTO=static
> BROADCAST=10.1.49.255
> DNS1=10.1.10.41
> DNS2=10.1.10.42
> GATEWAY=10.1.49.1
> HWADDR=00:17:a4:77:BB:14
> IPADDR=10.1.49.205
> NETMASK=255.255.255.0
> ONBOOT=yes
> DOMAIN="mydomain.com"

Heres a working one.
In your system-config-network  uncheck the box about NetworkManager and 
reboot.
Are you sure about the GATEWAY=   ???

DEVICE=eth0
ONBOOT=yes
TYPE=Ethernet
BOOTPROTO=static
IPADDR=192.168.1.254
NETMASK=255.255.255.0
NETWORK=
BROADCAST=192.168.1.255
GATEWAY=192.168.1.1
HWADDR=00:16:EC:69:37:55
DNS1=12.207.235.29
DNS2=12.207.232.41
DNS3=208.67.222.222
IPV6INIT=no
USERCTL=no
PEERDNS=yes