jan damborsky wrote:
> Currently, Automated installer uses multicast DNS for service discovery.
> The problem with the existing implementation is that since multicast DNS
> utilizes multicast IP packets which can deliver information only within
> local subnet, AI server can only serve AI clients on the same subnet.
> 
> It was initially considered to take advantage of unicast DNS to address
> this limitation. During investigation of possible approaches was
> discovered that more research is needed and more time has to be dedicated
> to design.
> 
> As a less risky solution at this point, fallback mechanism is considered
> to be used. This means that AI client will be provided with direct location
> of particular install service (machine address and port number) along
> with service name. If service discovery using multicast DNS fails,
> fallback mechanism will be used and machine providing given service
> will be connected directly.
> 
> The proposal suggests to take advantage of existing implementation
> and use the same mechanism for passing location of service which is
> used for passing install service name.
> 
> That means new option  (e.g. 'install_service_address') will be implemented
> and added along with existing 'install_service' to either
> GRUB menu.lst (for x86) or install.conf (for Sparc).
> 
> examples:
> * x86 menu.lst file
> ...
> kernel$ ... -B 
> install_media=<ai_image_location>,install_service=_install_service_46501,
> install_service_address=<machine>:<port>
> 
> * Sparc install.conf file
> install_service=_install_service_46501
> install_service_address=<machine>:<port>
> 
> Raised concerns:
> * we need to make sure that GRUB menu.lst is not overloaded
> 
> It is out of the scope of this fix to address this concern,
> but the longer term plan is to introduce common configuration file
> for both x86 and Sparc residing outside of AI image area
> (so that AI image can be lofi mounted - then it will be read only).
> Then AI client could process configuration file in the same way
> for both architectures and use menu.lst only for passing the necessary
> information (kernel and boot archive location, kernel parameters).
> 
> Please let me know, if you think it should be modified or different
> approach should be taken.

Jan,

This approach seems okay for the short term, or at least until
we get a conversation going with the boot team about this.


thanks,
-ethan


> 
> Thank you very much,
> Jan
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> caiman-discuss mailing list
> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss

Reply via email to