Am 03.12.2011 02:08, schrieb Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi: >> I don't see the point in adding FTP - HTTP is superior in any way. Other >> than that: Our .sfs images are rather tiny, you will barely notice the >> difference, so no objections from me. >> > OK, I will only add darkhttp. If HTTP works then also FTP will work from > the point of view of the hook.
Indeed. My concerns with FTP again: 1) gPXE/iPXE do not support FTP as it seems (only HTTP). 2) In general, FTP is more problematic from the network point-of-view, as it needs to open two connections. 3) HTTP is more stable than FTP from my experience. > geek comment: maybe it just fit in the multiple of current ISO padding > size :P I prefer to remaster the ISO onto USB (copy /arch, install syslinux) or netboot it over the internet. My concern therefore is the size of the .sfs files, not the actual .iso.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
