On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 17:16:32 -0500

Joel Newkirk  wrote:
> I disagree - I've been a vocal proponent for many months of "tidying

quoted text
> up" networking, including setting IP and subnet to something less

> likely to lead to conflicts.  Yes, I agree that the vast majority of

> people using a FreeRunner as I type this are quite capable of

> performing the changes you mention in under 2 minutes, but I also

> believe that most would be quite happy if they were not required to

> do so every time they flash their FR.  I personally use

> 192.168.0.202/30, with host machine (gateway from FR of course) set

> to .201, solely because that lets me set a static config on hosts to

> which I tether my FR and always reach even a fresh flashed image,

> with minimal disruption accessing other networks. (we have over 50

> subnets at work, including 192.168.0.0/24, that I need to access

> 24/7)  But I'd be wholeheartedly in support of a change to a less

> conflict-ridden subnet as the default, or at least a change of

> default to /30.

>

> "We've" not standardized on any set of IPs, and "finally" isn't even

> apropo since the 192.168.0.202/24 IP has been the de facto standard

> at least back to OM 2007.2.  And whether I am alone in not being

> "happy with it" or not, I like to believe I know how to use my

> system, being a veteran linux network/server admin for a broadband

> provider.

>

>

> Taking a broader and longer view of things, the goal of Openmoko

> surely is a smartphone that can be sold to general consumers, not

> just linux hackers, and as such it's entirely sensible to establish

> defaults that will cause the least degree of inconvenience to owners

> as possible.  (and in some opinions - including my own, after

> answering countless hundreds of phone calls from broadband users who

> don't even know what an IP address /IS/ - necessary)  And the earlier

> that change is made the better for the long term: the more

> FreeRunners there are in the wild, the more people there are who will

> be affected at the point of changeover, and the more likely they are

> to be less linux-networking-savvy than the average community member

> today.

>

> I think an eventual goal may be to have a USB networking config GUI

> and include that in initial setup steps for new owners or following a

> complete reflash, but until then (and as default entry from that

> point onward) I agree with establishing a default USBnet config that

> is less likely to cause the user any extra effort.

>

>

> Make the default network config as maintenance-free and

> interference-free as possible, and any linux hackers who want it more

> convoluted can surely take the 60 seconds they'd need to complicate

> it.  :)

>

> j

I couldn't agree more. I have a D-Link at home, that uses by default

192.168/16 as network, so I have to change my freerunner as well after

each reflash. And I'd like to believe I'm not the only one owning a

small router (for those curious: my D-Link doesn't allow me to change

my network range, so I need to change my freerunnner)
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:50:14 -0800, "Sargun Dhillon"

quoted text
>  wrote:

> > Most Linux users, or most users that this device is aimed at are

> > intelligent enough to do a

> > "ip addr add 192.168.0.200/32 dev usb0"

> > "ip route add 192.168.0.202/32 dev usb0"

not quite complete ... you need to set IP forwarding on the linux box,

change the netmask and the default route on FR and change

the /etc/resolv.conf file as well, otherwise no "opkg update" or alike.

I *know* people like free DNS servers, but most ISP's block access to

any other dns server in the world but their own, so ...
So I vote for a less used range as well.
Franky
_______________________________________________

Openmoko community mailing list

community@lists.openmoko.org

http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community