On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 11:57:15 -0400, Peter Jones wrote: > I don't think that's really right either. For one thing, things like > DHCP's timeout start counting at about the same time as "ifconfig up", > and association can take some time.
You're right, thanks for pointing this out. > But why don't we want to add a call to do this? I'd agree that it > shouldn't be a WE call. There seemed to be general agreement at OLS > last month that we should really be using netlink for this stuff anyway, > and it doesn't seem like adding a netlink call is all that painful. This means that wireless link couldn't be established without previous call to "some-iwconfig-replacement wlan0 up". Seems to be a bit confusing to users - I guess it won't be rare that users will forget this step. Maybe it can be eliminated by big fat warning in the some-iwconfig-replacement tool when setting things like mode or SSID. But is it really needed? Imagine the situation when computer is started with unplugged ethernet cable which is plugged in later. I know, this is rare, but - shouldn't be the right approach that DHCP is started by hotplug when the carrier is detected? Of course, startup script probably needs to wait for DHCP on some interface (marked as "main" or something) to properly set hostname before booting can continue. With a call to start association, startup script have to perform that call, wait for association (probably netlink event) and then start DHCP. Without that call, startup script will bring interface up, wait for carrier (netlink event) and then start DHCP. Seems to be the same. Or am I missing something? -- Jiri Benc SUSE Labs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
