Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Anyone tried NM with iwd? It can't connect to wifi properly
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Networking & Security
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jorgicio
n00b
n00b


Joined: 17 Oct 2014
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 3:37 pm    Post subject: Anyone tried NM with iwd? It can't connect to wifi properly Reply with quote

Hi!

As you may notice, recent version of net-misc/networkmanager (1.12.2) brings iwd support (which requires net-wireless/iwd). Of course, I had to rebuild the kernel because of lots of options required by iwd. Ok, everything fine, wpa_supplicant was removed and stuff, but I'm having problems with getting connected to wifi networks. It just can't connect.
I tried iwctl (as mentioned in the Gentoo Wiki) and it says "Operation aborted", but no more info than that. Also, Google can't help me on that because the iwd package is kinda "new". So I had to go back to wpa_supplicant. Also, the iwd comes with a daemon which is run when I tried to connect wifi, and only can connect once when I restart both daemons (NetworkManager and iwd) and then it has the same problem again and again.

May I have to do something else? Or iwd has some bugs which don't allow me to connect to wifi?

Thanks!

PS: Meanwhile, I'm using an ethernet connection, so I can be connected anytime I want to try new packages.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6228
Location: Room 101

PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jorgicio ...

I'd have to ask why you'd want this, what specific problem does it solve? wpa_supplicant has a proven track record, it's written and maintained by people with credible experience, and supports practically every feature of 802.11i, EAP, etc, logs without you having to setup a monitor interface, etc, etc. Whereas iwd is developed by intel, who where linux and the kernel is concerned have a fairly bad track record (including: binary blobs for wireless drivers, poor support for their graphics chips). When I read "aims to replace wpa_supplicant" I honestly can't think of a single reason for someone needing to do that ... other than so that they control the development of that particular area of networking/connectivity. wpa_supplicant, or hostapd (which is also maintained by w1.fi) are on practically every embeded WAP/WRT, and linux install ... and has been keeping apace of wireless developments for over 16 years, how much better is intel going to be (given its not an area they've contributed much too in the past, nor is it part of their revenue generation)?

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorgicio
n00b
n00b


Joined: 17 Oct 2014
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 2:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
jorgicio ...

I'd have to ask why you'd want this, what specific problem does it solve? wpa_supplicant has a proven track record, it's written and maintained by people with credible experience, and supports practically every feature of 802.11i, EAP, etc, logs without you having to setup a monitor interface, etc, etc. Whereas iwd is developed by intel, who where linux and the kernel is concerned have a fairly bad track record (including: binary blobs for wireless drivers, poor support for their graphics chips). When I read "aims to replace wpa_supplicant" I honestly can't think of a single reason for someone needing to do that ... other than so that they control the development of that particular area of networking/connectivity. wpa_supplicant, or hostapd (which is also maintained by w1.fi) are on practically every embeded WAP/WRT, and linux install ... and has been keeping apace of wireless developments for over 16 years, how much better is intel going to be (given its not an area they've contributed much too in the past, nor is it part of their revenue generation)?

best ... khay


I know, but some time in the future, wpa_supplicant may be deprecated (I hope not) as being iwd promoted as a replace for wpa_supplicant. Also, when I tried iwd, I noted the boot is quickly and doesn't get stuck, which happens when used wpa_supplicant, and I don't know why. And the documentation about iwd is kinda little.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6228
Location: Room 101

PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jorgicio wrote:
[...] but some time in the future, wpa_supplicant may be deprecated [...]

jorgicio ... but why would wpa_supplicant be depreciated, is there some technical reason why it's nolonger fit for purpose?

jorgicio wrote:
[...] being iwd promoted as a replace for wpa_supplicant.

By whom? I can guess what that "promotion" will amount to: "works better with NetworkManager", whereas wpa_supplicant runs on every variety of linux, and bsd, there is even a windows version. So why do we need a replacement?

jorgicio wrote:
Also, when I tried iwd, I noted the boot is quickly and doesn't get stuck, which happens when used wpa_supplicant, and I don't know why. And the documentation about iwd is kinda little.

That sounds as though you're starting wpa_supplicant, when you shouldn't be, as it's started by NetworkManager.

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorgicio
n00b
n00b


Joined: 17 Oct 2014
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
jorgicio wrote:
[...] but some time in the future, wpa_supplicant may be deprecated [...]

jorgicio ... but why would wpa_supplicant be depreciated, is there some technical reason why it's nolonger fit for purpose?

jorgicio wrote:
[...] being iwd promoted as a replace for wpa_supplicant.

By whom? I can guess what that "promotion" will amount to: "works better with NetworkManager", whereas wpa_supplicant runs on every variety of linux, and bsd, there is even a windows version. So why do we need a replacement?

jorgicio wrote:
Also, when I tried iwd, I noted the boot is quickly and doesn't get stuck, which happens when used wpa_supplicant, and I don't know why. And the documentation about iwd is kinda little.

That sounds as though you're starting wpa_supplicant, when you shouldn't be, as it's started by NetworkManager.

best ... khay


1) I'm not saying that it will going to be deprecated, but some time in the future it may happen as it may not. It happened with lots of projects (i.e. OSS was deprecated when PulseAudio came in). Preventing is the best idea (I'm still using wpa_supplicant until it may not going be supported anymore)

2) I'm not saying this is better than wpa_supplicant, also, iwd can be used as a standalone package. Don't tell this to me. Tell it to Intel or whoever is going to promote iwd as a replacement for wpa_supplicant (checked in some wikis like the Gentoo one, ArchLinux and Debian, which are where I got the documentation)

3) I'm not using wpa_supplicant as a daemon, it starts with NetworkManager.

Also, the question here is for support, not for critics. I know iwd is not the best option (indeed, it doesn't work properly, but sometime will), but this is NOT the point of the post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorgicio
n00b
n00b


Joined: 17 Oct 2014
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2018 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now iwd works flawlessly since some version (now I'm using the 0.10 version). However, sometimes, at start, it can't find the wireless networks until I restart both iwd and NetworkManager (also I made NetworkManager depend on iwd). But at least it can connect to wireless networks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Networking & Security All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum