Merge ~jbicha/network-manager:master into network-manager:master

Proposed by Jeremy Bícha
Status: Rejected
Rejected by: Jeremy Bícha
Proposed branch: ~jbicha/network-manager:master
Merge into: network-manager:master
Diff against target: 64 lines (+29/-0)
4 files modified
debian/20-connectivity.conf (+3/-0)
debian/changelog (+9/-0)
debian/control (+16/-0)
debian/network-manager-config-connectivity.install (+1/-0)
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Aron Xu Needs Information
Review via email: mp+318031@code.staging.launchpad.net

Description of the change

By adding a separate package for this config snippet, it enables Ubuntu flavors to easily opt into the NetworkManager connectivity status check by recommending this package. Ubuntu users can easily override the default by installing or uninstalling this package.

I will be proposing this for zesty Feature Freeze Exception and I will bring it up for discussion on the ubuntu-devel list, so let's wait to merge until we get approval.

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Matteo Croce (teknoraver) :
Revision history for this message
Aron Xu (happyaron) wrote :

I have a few questions:

1. Whether the 5-minute checks will congest Canonical's web servers? Or local network operators may see a lot of Ubuntu desktops flooding the same request so frequently.

2. How to deal with caches? Google uses HTTPS + 204 response code, and Apple uses HTTPS + text file. The approach we are using is more likely to the latter one, but it does not support HTTPS.

review: Needs Information
Revision history for this message
Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) wrote :

Aron, could you ask someone in Canonical's web development about your first question?

I think this will have zero affect on other network operators. (All the other major operating systems do basically the same thing and almost anything else that uses the web will have a bigger effect.)

I don't know anything about #2. I think generally these network-connectivity-check URLs use http because there are problems with trying to ping a https server with a captive portal.

Also, could you maybe bring up your concerns on the ubuntu-devel list thread I started so that more people will see?

Revision history for this message
Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) wrote :

There are many other URIs that work. Some I know of are:

http://network-test.debian.org/nm
http://nmcheck.gnome.org/check_network_status.txt
http://fedoraproject.org/static/hotspot.txt (redirects to HTTPS, Fedora has set response to "OK")
http://www.pkgbuild.com/check_network_status.txt (Arch Linux, redirects to HTTPS)

I think it would be preferable for it to be Canonical-hosted though.

Revision history for this message
Saurav Sengupta (sauravsengupta) wrote :

Does that Lorem ipsum response for the uri in this proposal work? It didn't work for me on Ubuntu GNOME 16.10 (the login popup appeared with the root page open for nmcheck.gnome.org). I think it should be something like response=<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC for uri=http://start.ubuntu.com/connectivity-check.html (see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/997200/comments/4) because it checks from the beginning of the body content, not the rendered text; or else change the uri.

Revision history for this message
Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) wrote :

Saurav, thanks for the feedback. Yes, I see that the start.ubuntu.com URI does not work. I am going to see if I can find someone at Canonical that can set up one that works. Meanwhile, I'll set the URI to Debian's which I did test.

You also saw something else because gnome-shell hardcodes a nmcheck.gnome.org URI which I think we'll want to patch out:
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell/tree/js/portalHelper/main.js#n28

Revision history for this message
Saurav Sengupta (sauravsengupta) wrote :

A bit off-topic here, but if you're going to patch the portal helper, could you also see if the window can be made to remain in the background (perhaps insert a set_keep_below call (https://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/stable/GtkWindow.html#gtk-window-set-keep-below) before the present_with_time call on line #165)? Sorry if this seems ignorant, but I don't have good knowledge of GTK+.

Revision history for this message
Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) wrote :

This has been merged in, similarly but slightly differently in Artful and Debian unstable.

There was an error fetching revisions from git servers. Please try again in a few minutes. If the problem persists, contact Launchpad support.

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches

to all changes: