On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:12:01AM -0400, Dan wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > >On Wednesday 26 April 2006 20:00, Charles Curley wrote: > > > > > You two seem to be having lots of trouble with NM, so I'd just like > to put it out there: works for me. No configuration in > system-config-network, any scripts, or anything, just a clean FC5 > install, installed the ipw2200 driver, configured NM/NMDispatcher > services to start on start, and network to not, rebooted. Clicked > the nm-applet icon, connect to other network, entered WEP key (I've > used both 128 and 64 bit keys in both hex and ASCII versions, all > work fine), connect. Hmm, the main difference here seems to be that I upgraded from FC4 to FC5, and had a prior configuration set up manually. I wonder if NM ignores networks it finds in the system-config-network stuff? I have changed the key form my network in system-config-network from the 64 bit to the 128 bit, but I did that after NM found the network, after I switched it to use 128 bit keys. > The first time it took a long time but after that, what you'd > expect, 5-10 seconds. I tried WPA once and it didnt work, but I > think that's not exactly a NM issue, I didn't have the motivation to > look into that. I haven't tried WPA either. > I usually just connect to my WEP router with a wire anyway, and > the wireless network i connect to just has a VPN. This also works > flawlessly by the way, with NetworkManager-vpnc. > NM doesn't read any keys set up for network, it stores them itself when > you enter them in its dialogs. It does however read settings for static > IP and such from network. > Shared keys were originally intended to be a more secure way to initiate > connection with a WEP-protected access point, as the key needs to be > validated before a client can even connect, however this actually makes > it less secure, as the key can (theoretically) be reverse engineered > from the router's challenge broadcast. So open authentication is > recommended, and I believe it is the one NM is intended to work > with. Well, I'm on my network now using NM and shared keys. If NM is supposed to "just work", then it has no business being picky about network setup. It should work (or do its best) even if the designers don't lke how you have your network set up. > There is definitely a lack of documentation for NM, but thats > probably because its a very simple GUI program designed to "just > work" and doesn't have a lot of advanced features to document. It's the lack of documentation for the bloody basic functions that annoys me. The job ain't over til the paperwork's done, and that includes the documentation. > I'm sure it will get better with time. I certainly hope so. I consider it of alpha or beta quality, for the user hostility, including the lack of documentation. > I hope somehow you two can get it working eventually, it's really > very nice when it works :). Yes, it is. -- Charles Curley /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign Looking for fine software \ / Respect for open standards and/or writing? X No HTML/RTF in email http://www.charlescurley.com / \ No M$ Word docs in email Key fingerprint = CE5C 6645 A45A 64E4 94C0 809C FFF6 4C48 4ECD DFDB
Attachment:
pgpVv5HIZN2aR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
