Talk:Network configuration

From ArchWiki
(Redirected from Talk:Configuring network)
Jump to: navigation, search

Wired network configuration

The introduction states:

"This page explains how to set up a wired connection to a network. If you need to set up wireless networking see the Wireless network configuration page."

So, should this page be renamed to 'Wired network configuration ? Though in an ideal world, both Wired and Wireless configuration pages would be merged to reduce duplication, and move subtopics such as Troubleshooting to subpages ... -- Alad (talk) 14:39, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't really mind the current state, i.e. Wireless network configuration building on top of Network configuration (with a small overlap in Wireless_network_configuration#Check_the_driver_status). Otherwise there would have to be a "Network configuration" page and "Wired" and "Wireless" subpages, but what content from the current Network configuration is specific to wired connections? I think only Network_configuration#Device_Driver (which is easy to generalize) and Network_configuration#Troubleshooting. On the other hand most of the content in Wireless network configuration is unique to wireless devices, so IMO it is more natural to have just 2 pages instead of 3. Maybe the introduction should be modified instead? -- Lahwaacz (talk) 16:30, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
If we keep two pages, perhaps we should move Wireless network configuration to Network configuration/Wireless, in addition to rewording the introduction? -- Alad (talk) 01:36, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
It might be argued that pages like dhcpcd, Internet sharing, Network bridge or MAC address spoofing could be all subpages of Network configuration, just like Wireless network configuration, and that's why they are all in Category:Networking already. That's exactly the problem Wikipedia decided to solve by not using subpages for categorization, which I think makes sense here. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 07:28, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Device names

I've updated the section to also introduce users to Should we switch the whole section to prefer the systemd mechanism over udev? I'd vote in favor of systemd, since I believe systemd.links will instruct udev and not the other way round. I also find the link files easier to read and understand. We could keep the udev rules as a side note, but I'd rather remove them -1 (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

At least a note that udev processes the result of the link files should be kept. I'd also keep udev in Network_configuration#Reverting_to_traditional_device_names because contains more than just the way interface names are set up. Maybe it is not the best idea, it should be possible to override just the NamePolicy. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 21:51, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll just quickly read up on how the mechanism works exactly. I shall retain some information on udev as an alternative and remove overlaps. -1 (talk) 22:05, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry to say, but the rabbit hole got too deep and I sadly don't have the time to research this properly. I reverted the changes to the device name section since I don't want to leave the section in this unpolished state. I'd be happy if anyone wants to pick it up again: have a look at this diff. -1 (talk) 13:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Set device MTU and queue length

I don't think info about changing MTU should be shared because it is almost certainly not what you want to do. Anyone that needs to do this will easily figure out how to do this. I feel making this info available somehow makes people think its a good thing to do, which it almost always is not and requiring it is probably hinting at a different problem.

I find it very unlikely anyone will need to increase the qlen. Very unlikely.

—This unsigned comment is by Rnabinger (talk) 05:37, 30 March 2017‎. Please sign your posts with ~~~~!

I agree. Moved to tips and tricks. -- Rdeckard (talk) 15:42, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

dhcpcd static profile expansion

In reference to the flag for expansion mentioning that the dhcpcd static profile is gone - it is now linked with the other network managers in the table. Static IP addresses can be assigned with all of the listed network managers, so I don't think we should list dhcpcd here as a special case. -- Rdeckard (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Indeed, I missed that the table contains something else from the Network manager list. On second thought, maybe dhcpcd should be added there as well. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 20:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)