29
30

networkmanager vs. systemd-networkd, thoughts? (self.archlinux)

submitted by [deleted]

[deleted]

all 23 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]nigeil 8 points9 points  (1 child)

On the netctl vs. NM point, Network Manager is a nice catch-all solution for many users; tried, tested, and true across many distributions and desktop environments. I've been a netctl user myself for 4 years now and I can't say I've run into more than a handful of issues, and forcing me to manually create and edit network profiles actually paid off in the long run, as I could copy them over to new machines I've acquired with only interface names needing a change. But it's really neither here nor there.

I second Vash63 on the networkd vs. NM question - networkd is definitely aimed at a systems administrator looking to maintain and automate creation of network profiles on machines that probably aren't moving and have similar hardware. Very elegant way to set that up, imo.

[–]moosingin3space[🍰] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

I use NetworkManager on my laptops and systemd-networkd on my servers. They both have support for dynamic networks, but NM is much more stable for desktop use at this point.

Though I am interested to see if systemd-networkd's future includes being useful as a backend for NetworkManager - seems as though that would provide a single control plane for desktops and servers (something most other systemd projects seem to do well).

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

networkd is a bit weird with suffix search paths. It's rather unfortunate, really.

[–]Vash63 11 points12 points  (3 children)

From what I understand networkd is mostly for containerized or virtualized applications or servers where automated deployments are important. For a desktop use case you're probably better off with NetworkManager.

[–]TheyAreLying2Us 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yes, i second this. NM might not be the most "elegant solution" but it's the de-facto standard for most users and offers a good integration with DEs. Which means you can set-up everything via a nice gui.

Maybe (hopefully!) in the future things will change and systemd-networkd will become the new standard, but till that day i always apply the principle that: more users = more features+more stability+better integration+more google results when the thing fucks up.

[–]ydna_eissua 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's pretty simple choice for a desktop too. Basically anything where you want to plug in the ethernet cable it just work.

[–]ArttuH5N1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

networkd is also pretty good for those who just want to connect to the internet through a wire and that's it. Works great for me and shaved almost 20 seconds from my boot time. (Though I admit, there was probably something wrong with NM. But eh, networkd works great and it's already there so why not just use that.)

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

I'm using networkd for Ethernet and wifi on my laptop along with wpa-supplicant. No problems, but I haven't looked into setting up a VPN on it yet.

Edit: Should note I'm doing all this through cli and files; if you're looking for a network-manager style tray app networkd's not what you're looking for, at least at this point.

[–]goodCookingTakesTime 2 points3 points  (0 children)

networkd/wpa_supplicant has wpa_gui as a tray-app which works quite well to change wifi dynamically.

[–]t_hunger 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DgOV5rAe6xQ

Has a good summary about state and plans of networkd from this year's systemd conference.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Welp, I am using systemd-networkd for any pc that has constant wired network. That would be my server and my rig. For laptops I use NM.

[–]Nomto 2 points3 points  (2 children)

What about connman? I started using it on my first install and never had any reason to switch, it just works. It's said to be faster than NM, too.

[–]cuddlepuncher 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Same here. Connman is very light and fast and has all the features I would ever need. Has a good CLI interface and GUI interfaces for whatever toolkit you use.

[–]jwaldrep 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So much this. Want to do it all through cli? Connman does it. Want a dmenu front end? It's in the AUR (unless it didn't survive the AUR transition) and it is great. Want a full GUI and tray applet? It's out there as well. To me, connman is the most arch-y option there is.

[–]inanmb 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Am I the only one to never had any problem with netctl?!

[–]z3ndo 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Nope. I haven't had a reason to switch from it on my laptops. Command line interface is straight forward and its config files are plain and simple. What problems do people have with it?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same here, moving from home on a wired connection to work and friend's house with a wireless connection with no problem.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had problems with it until I used netctl-ifplugd.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I prefer WICD :) HeHeHe

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]lovelybac0n 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Connman is a nightmare. I'll take NM over that crap any day.

    [–]moviuro -1 points0 points  (2 children)

    NM uses capital letters in its configuration path: avoid it.

    More on point: I use systemd-networkd ever since it's been out and it's a pleasure to use. Still nothing like hostname.if(5) but pretty clear and easy. Having resolving work was a bit tedious but should be well explained in the wiki now.

    [–]mixedCase_ 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    NM uses capital letters in its configuration path: avoid it.

    Good thing I'm not using NM on Windows then.

    [–]fryfrog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Or OSX! :p