Intel's IWD 1.17 Wireless Daemon Brings More Fixes

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Intel's IWD 1.17 Wireless Daemon Brings More Fixes

While it was busy on the hardware side of the house with Intel talking up all of their forthcoming hardware, Intel's open-source software engineers remain very busy working not only to enable their next-generation hardware but other open-source efforts they've invested in like the iNet wireless daemon...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Intel-IWD-1.17

[jstoik]

I wish Ubuntu would update the dependency list for NetworkManager to accept IWD as an alternative to WPASupplicant. I've been using IWD (with WPASupplicant hackily disabled) since Eoan; it clearly works. Haha.

[Grim85]

Last I checked it wont do 802.1X radius WPA-Enterprise without doing per SSID conf files, which isan instant nonstarter

[Sonadow]

Last I checked it wont do 802.1X radius WPA-Enterprise without doing per SSID conf files, which isan instant nonstarter

And what's wrong with that?

I maintain per-ssid conf files for wpasupplicant as well.

[Grim85]

And what's wrong with that?

I maintain per-ssid conf files for wpasupplicant as well.

as in you cant connect to them through network manager before first doing a provisioning file, from an end user perspective that's not good

[p4r4d0x]

On Fedora 34 GNOME doesn't want to automatically connect and sometimes gets glitchy if I used IWD, but it's very close to being a replacement.

[Vistaus]

I wonder if 1.17 will work better as I couldn't get 1.16 to connect to my Wi-Fi network (was not an issue with, I think 1.14).

[pininety]

as in you cant connect to them through network manager before first doing a provisioning file, from an end user perspective that's not good

Jup, that is one of the big issues I also still have. The other issue is that they very much developed this for embedded devices instead of multi-user systems so you only get configuration on the system level instead of the user level which sucks if you wan tto build a stateless system.