Networking Follies

Charles Curley charlescurley at
Fri Jul 7 23:58:05 UTC 2006

On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 04:02:13PM -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Charles Curley wrote:

> Have you tried creating a new user and giving NM a shot there?  

No. Are there user configuration files for NM? That's the only thing I
can think of that would make this test useful. Anyway, I tried it, and
got nowhere useful, except I got this:

[root at dragon ~]# ifconfig
dev23266  Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:10:C6:C0:AA:26
          UP BROADCAST MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
          RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 b)

eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:13:CE:70:53:C8
          inet addr:  Bcast:  Mask:
          RX packets:264 errors:33 dropped:33 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:183 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
          RX bytes:7486111 (7.1 MiB)  TX bytes:1492356 (1.4 MiB)
          Interrupt:11 Base address:0x4000 Memory:c0204000-c0204fff

lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
          inet addr:  Mask:
          inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
          RX packets:997 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:997 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
          RX bytes:154664 (151.0 KiB)  TX bytes:154664 (151.0 KiB)

OK, where are the mutant device names coming from? I had created the
new user, logged out as my usual user, then logged in as the new
user. I fired up NM as root, of course. Eths 0 and 1 were there before
and no mutant device names. Oh, and the effort failed.

> What's in /var/log/messages?  Obviously, NM puts a lot of logging
> info there, but perhaps if you scan through it you'll find some
> obvious problem that's just not making it back to you via the GUI.

I don't see anything obvious. Here's a wierd one:

Deactivating device dev3514.

I see other more reasonable device names like eth0 and eth1, but
that's another mutant device name.

I see quite a few of these:

Activation (eth0/wireless): association took too long (>20s), failing activation.

Since the keys haven't changed and I can log in with "service network
start", I suspect a bug in NM. But then again, I get similar messages
using a kernel and version of NM that used to work. Ideas?

The "activation" lines are interlaced with a slew of WPA supplicant
lines. Since WPA is not an issue on this network, I wonder if WPA
Supplicant and NM are tripping over each other. However, I looked at
some old logs that show sucessful activations. They show similar
interlacing, so I don't think that's the issue.


Charles Curley                  /"\    ASCII Ribbon Campaign
Looking for fine software       \ /    Respect for open standards
and/or writing?                  X     No HTML/RTF in email    / \    No M$ Word docs in email

Key fingerprint = CE5C 6645 A45A 64E4 94C0  809C FFF6 4C48 4ECD DFDB
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the users mailing list