Scratch the first part, won't make a difference it you created those files. I mistook utadm -a looking for them vs creating them. It creates them (duh! which is why you start with an unplumbed NIC). Those files have no Use in S11 and have been replaced by dladm/ipadm.
Regardless, a lot of work. LAN based is the way to go. If you really need private interconnects while running S11, you'll have to hack away with current release. On Aug 23, 2012, at 12:27 PM, Craig Bender <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dave, > > You would have had to have at least created /etc/hostname.<INTF> and > /etc/defaultrouter as those aren't part of S11 anymore and also, was this an > interface you had already plumbed up? > > Did the vendor class tags get inserted into DHCP macros? > > Part of a private interface is that it starts with a unplumbed NIC. Which is > why utadm -a takes an interface arg. utadm -A can look a lot like private > interconnect but it's for a subnet, not a NIC. There are several other > differences, but NIC vs Subnet is one of the largest. > > -A is not considered a private interconnect. It's a LAN based interconnect > with the ability to serve DHCP vendor class tags for many different (even > non-local) subnets with DHCP Helpers on routers. > > Basic networking config, prior to S11, was done through files. No longer the > case, and one of the reasons utadm -a is broken. So if you really created a > private interconnect, you'd would have had to use dladm/ipadm to manually > configure the NIC. > > > Another observation/question. It sounds like will have multiple DHCP servers > on the same segment? At least that's how I understood your range comment. > > Is that true? > > If so, how are you preventing PC's from using the Sun Ray Server's DHCP and > vice versa? > > I can tell you why it work would, even if a Sun Ray gets an address the other > server, it's because when the Sun Ray didn't get all of the info it needed to > connect, so it sent out a DHCPInform request, which the DHCP Server on the > Sun Ray answered (even it if didn't provide the IP address). You'd actually > see this via utquery. You'd have two different values for DHCP server and > DHCPInform server. The default of -A is not to offer IP addresses. > > > If that's how you been used to doing things, then there really is no reason > to do anything but LAN only connections. > > On the DHCP server that was serving the PCs, you could set option 66 > (tftpserver) and point it to the Sun Ray Server. This was you are > provision/controlling the Sun Ray clients from via parameter files. There is > also DHCP option 49, but option 49 will just let the Sun Ray find the server > for a session, it won't tell it the firmware server. > > There are a few other options, such using DNS names. > sunray-config-servers.fqdn is like option 66 > sunray-servers.fqdn is like option 49 > > So instead worrying about making changes to many dhcp servers or messing with > vendor class options, LAN based interconnects with these more standardized > provisioning options is far easier. > > > > > > > On 8/23/12 11:50 AM, Dave Price wrote: >> Daer Craig, Toomas and all other who offered advice... >> >> I am not yet totally sure what final sequence of hacking >> working, but I just manage to get "private interconnect" >> wokking on Solaris 11!! >> >> I copied in /etc/init.d/dhcp into a local directory >> >> I then bodged utadm to pick up my local copy.. >> >> then I bodged around trying to get the -A option working... >> >> then I tried to look at dhcp with dhtadm and pntadm >> but only had bits of stuff and... >> >> Then I hacked about with some /etc/hostname.net? files >> then I removed one, then I messed about with /etc/inet/hosts >> >> and then I thought I would have a final go at running >> my bodged utadm with the -a option again.... >> >> and, suddenly things seems to be playing the game... >> >> then I did utstart -c >> >> and then I went and restart one of my SunRays... >> >> first attempt it latched on to my (other) Solaris 10 >> server, then I tried again, and this time it latched on the the Solaris 11 >> server, updated its firmware, then gave a log on display >> and then I logged in to Solaris 11, on a private interconnect >> from a SunRay!! >> >> I had been taking copious notes, but then as frustration >> rose, I dropped into "hacking" and only taking partial notes! >> >> I now need to look back carefully through my bash history file and try >> to decide what caused it to finally work! >> >> I will then revert back to an earlier BE, make a new >> one and then try to repeat the final steps again >> taking proper notes again! I will not destroy my "current" BE and then if >> things go pear-shaped I can come back to this and >> try to spot differences. >> >> So, I am now MUCh more happy, but frustrated that I allowed >> myself to drop into "hacking" and ceasing to take proper notes! >> >> More tomorrow, nearly 8pm here in the UK so I think >> I have had enough and I may stop before I go >> and break something! >> >> Dave Price >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SunRay-Users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users >> > _______________________________________________ > SunRay-Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users _______________________________________________ SunRay-Users mailing list [email protected] http://www.filibeto.org/mailman/listinfo/sunray-users
