Description of problem: Connections of ip-tunnel type are not visible in the interactive tools like nmtui or nm-connection-editor and can only be controlled using nmcli. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): NetworkManager-1.2.4-3.fc24.x86_64 NetworkManager-tui-1.2.4-3.fc24.x86_64 nm-connection-editor-1.2.4-2.fc24.x86_64 How reproducible: Always. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Create an ipv6 tunnel using nmcli, for example: nmcli c add type ip-tunnel con-name sit1 ifname sit1 mode sit remote IPV4_SERVER -- connection.metered no ipv4.method disabled ipv6.method manual ipv6.address IPV6_CLIENT ipv6.gateway IPV6_SERVER ip-tunnel.ttl 64 2. Start nmtui or nm-connection-editor. Actual results: The newly created connection is not visible. It's only listed in `nmcli c' output. Expected results: Tunnel connection is visible and manageable using both nmtui and nm-connection-editor.
Pushed nmtui support for ip-tunnel connections to bg/tui-ip-tunnel-rh1391424 branch for review.
branch looks very nice. Only tiny complains. >> ip-tunnel: fail the activation for unknown tunnel modes the patch seems to change two things at once, I don't understand the reason for the change + if (mode == NM_IP_TUNNEL_MODE_UNKNOWN || link_type == NM_LINK_TYPE_UNKNOWN) should be explained in the commit message. I don't like: default: - g_return_val_if_reached (NM_LINK_TYPE_UNKNOWN); + return NM_LINK_TYPE_UNKNOWN; } I think the "default:" label should be removed entirely, and all known enum values should be explicitly listed. How about moving g_return_val_if_reached() outside the switch, and handle all expectedly-unknown values explicitly. > tui: add support for IP tunnel connections +#include "nm-default.h" + +#include "nm-editor-bindings.h" + +#include "nmt-page-ip-tunnel.h" the order of includes should be #include "nm-default.h" #include "nmt-page-ip-tunnel.h" // optional system headers // optional internal nmtui headers
(In reply to Thomas Haller from comment #2) > >> ip-tunnel: fail the activation for unknown tunnel modes > > the patch seems to change two things at once, I don't understand the reason > for the change > > + if (mode == NM_IP_TUNNEL_MODE_UNKNOWN || link_type == > NM_LINK_TYPE_UNKNOWN) > > should be explained in the commit message. Amended the commit message, is it better now? > I don't like: > > default: > - g_return_val_if_reached (NM_LINK_TYPE_UNKNOWN); > + return NM_LINK_TYPE_UNKNOWN; > } > > I think the "default:" label should be removed entirely, and all known enum > values should be explicitly listed. > > How about moving g_return_val_if_reached() outside the switch, and handle > all expectedly-unknown values explicitly. I don't think we should have any assertion there. The enum of possible modes can be expanded in the future and so there shouldn't be any constraint on it. If one creates an IP-tunnel connection using a new mode and then downgrades NM, it would throw an assertion. Instead I think we should accept everything, but fail the connection if we don't recognize the mode. > > tui: add support for IP tunnel connections > the order of includes should be > > #include "nm-default.h" > > #include "nmt-page-ip-tunnel.h" > > // optional system headers > > // optional internal nmtui headers Fixed.
(In reply to Beniamino Galvani from comment #3) > (In reply to Thomas Haller from comment #2) > I don't think we should have any assertion there. The enum of possible modes > can be expanded in the future and so there shouldn't be any constraint on > it. If one creates an IP-tunnel connection using a new mode and then > downgrades NM, it would throw an assertion. they can be extended, but then we should extend tunnel_mode_to_link_type() as well. How about the two additional commits I pushed to your branch? branch lgtm now
(In reply to Thomas Haller from comment #4) > (In reply to Beniamino Galvani from comment #3) > > (In reply to Thomas Haller from comment #2) > > > I don't think we should have any assertion there. The enum of possible modes > > can be expanded in the future and so there shouldn't be any constraint on > > it. If one creates an IP-tunnel connection using a new mode and then > > downgrades NM, it would throw an assertion. > > they can be extended, but then we should extend tunnel_mode_to_link_type() > as well. > > How about the two additional commits I pushed to your branch? Look good, thanks.
Branch bg/tui-ip-tunnel-rh1391424 merged to master: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/commit/?id=d9b529b47b48af08f18193c238046b45247fb61e nm-connection-editor support still to be done.
Bumping to F25 as I upgraded my machine.
support for IP tunnels have been added to nmtui and nm-connection-editor. Hence, this bug has been fixed upstream. Moving bug state to MODIFIED. nm-applet doesn't allow you to activate such connection types. With respect of nm-applet support, that would warrant a different bug... or maybe it's out of scope for the applet anyway...
This message is a reminder that Fedora 25 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 25. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '25'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 25 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
It looks like it's fixed in F26.
Fedora 25 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2017-12-12. Fedora 25 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.