On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 9:39 PM, Nikola M. via illumos-developer < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 08/ 8/14 03:27 PM, Gary Mills via illumos-developer wrote: > >> All of those things called wanboot will be retained. The only thing >> that will disappear is the single stand-alone SPARC executable that is >> the first file sent to a SPARC machine when it's doing a network boot. >> > Can wanboot be shipped and compiled separately from illumos? > Because, if one wants to remove/disable advanced functionality from > OS/Kernel and replace it with something less advanced , Procedure to > maintain and use it should be described in the process. > > To translate into real life language, as I understand (correct me): > > Users won't be able to boot SPARC from x86 server over lan or wan (?) , > Users *will* be able to boot SPARC, over LAN using TFTP. (inetboot). They *won't* be able to boot over a network that requires HTTP or HTTPS. This is irrespective of the server in use. > SPARC server won't be able to boot SPARC over wan > Correct. More correctly, SPARC will be unable to boot over WAN. It will be able to boot over LAN using the same type of mechanisms employed by the x86 port currently. (Instead of using PXEboot to get the kernel and initial image, the SPARC OpenBoot ROM will tftp a special kernel, called inetboot, that can load the kernel and ramdisk just like pxeboot does on x86. The boot server can be either x86 or SPARC. Actually, it can be *any* platform that has a functional DHCP and TFTP service. > AI installs will stop working (?) (main way to massively deploy illumos > installs/versus S11 licencing) > Wrong. AI will work just fine. > One would need to ship also separate boot server to deploying location and > jump around it when shipping other servers to a customers, if booting over > LAN > and 'https is not needed' in 2014..(?) as well as signed boot images (and > a little bit more bashing of Sparc) > The boot server (tftp, and dhcp) must be on the same LAN. (Technically, that might not be true. It might be possible to TFTP over a routed network, but I'm not sure it is supported in the inetboot image. In any case, you'd need a local DHCP server. That's not such a big deal. > > As I understood, wanboot is actually more advanced way of booting from > network and allows you to ship hardware to a customer on the other side of > the world, letting it call back securely over internet to boot and make you > setup machine the way you want to particular customer remotely. > Correct. Its not just setup, its entire installation. You can setup a system remotely just fine in terms of configuration, etc. Its getting the initial image on the system that is tricky. > If it is removed, technician needs to travel to the customer location > instead of sitting where he is, managing newly shipped servers. > Or, ship a hard disk with an installed copy. Or have someone stick in a USB stick with an image. Or ship the system pre-installed. The use case for wanboot is for systems that need to be installed where they are deployed in network closets, without any local human hands, AND with no local support servers. This is an exceedingly rare configuration. Btw, this type of installation is outright impossible with Intel, since Intel boot firmware doesn't support anything more advanced than PXE. > Isn't that big waste of time and money and in some cases, new customers? > (that does not want to pay additional expanses of new server implementation) > Almost nobody has ever used wanboot, and I'll venture to say with illumos and OpenSolaris, I think it actually *is* nobody. Installation of SPARC over the network has worked find for many many years using TFTP. Removal of wanboot doesn't impact it. > And can removed parts be separated somewhere where they could sit with > description how to compile and use them if needed, instead of torching them? Its *SCM*. Anyone can take a look at the history in git and recover them from there. I've no interest in providing further instruction, as I'm 99% certain nobody would use such instruction. Note, if you've ever used wanboot, then I'll give your opinion a little more weight. Since its clear that you haven't, and since I know you're not an active developer for illumos (meaning you're not in a position to help the sustaining effort, or possibly even to judge the cost of sustaining), your opinion in this regard doesn't carry a lot of weight. - Garrett ------------------------------------------- illumos-discuss Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/182180/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/182180/21175430-2e6923be Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21175430&id_secret=21175430-6a77cda4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
