Quoting Alessandro Baggi (2019-11-21 12:46:53) > I installed KDE and I tried to configure the network using > NetworkManager (nmcli). [ snipped many nmcli commands to program a complex network setup] > On a notebook, desktop or workstation with simple ethernet/wifi > connection this could be useful but on workstation with non classic > configuration or on a server I could not see how NM complexity could > give some benefit. > I found interfaces method more readable, simpler to write, simpler to > manage and more "ready to work". > > NM is a replace of ifconfig,brctl,route command? Network Manager is an _alternative_ network management tool - which happens to be tightly integrated with several of the most popular _desktop_ systems offered by Debian, and therefore easily mistaken as replacing other tools. The _default network management tool continues to be ifupdown. Network Manager, and systemd-networkd, and other network managers, each integrate or coordinate (or back off) in the presence of ifupdown - to varying ways. > Can someone explain in which case NM is better vs interfaces speaking > of server and workstation with multiple bridge? The main benefit of Network Manager is its user-friendly interface. If you want efficient _programming_ of complex network setups, then you are likely better off using ifupdown or systemd-networkd. Not necessarily, only likely. YMMV. Debian offers choices here. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature