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