Fog, Atftpd, iPxe and Http as transort protocol !
-
We have fully functioning Atftpd and ipxe.
Wim files are booted well.
But there is no success to boot from iso (o course via network) using memdisk via menu.
Is it possible to include atftpd to FOG installation for user choosing as a installation part ?
And now Atftpd and ipxe is set up to transmit files notr via slow tftp but via faster http protocol.
Is such possible to set up with FOG ? -
@CpServiceSPb Maybe I am missing something here but I can’t see why using “advanced TFTP daemon” (atftpd) would help improve FOG. Not saying it’s bad to use it but I simply don’t see the advantage.
But there is no success to boot from iso (o course via network) using memdisk via menu.
I guess this has nothing to do with either using atftpd or the common tftpd-hpa which we normally use. Maybe take a picture of the error you see and we might be able to help you out.
And now Atftpd and ipxe is set up to transmit files notr via slow tftp but via faster http protocol.
This is not something atftpd is doing but simply iPXE being able to request files via HTTP(S) - which we actually use for years (since version 1.2.0 or even earlier).
Possibly I just miss-understood what you were trying to suggest. Please bear with me and explain in more detail what you are trying to do and why we should add atftp to FOG.
Which version of FOG do you use at the moment?
-
@Sebastian-Roth
Hi to all and to Sebastian.
I want to install and use FOG.
I read somewhere that atftpd is quicker and much functional.
Also I have set up one and we and because of it I would like that atftpd would be added to FOG project as alternatices for who already use it not and tftpd-hpa.
And did I understand correctly that I can boot windows ISO (not only Linux) over network using FOG and tftpd-hpa ? -
@CpServiceSPb well, if you know how fog works, the fastest FTP service in the world will not change the speed at which FOG operates, there is no technical advantage of one ftp service over the other.
FOG uses tftp to load iPXE on the target computer. So if you consider ipxe.efi that is about 1MB of data being sent over tftp (for the ipxe kernel). tftp is mandatory because most network PXE boot loaders only support transferring over tftp. Get the network firmware vendors to support http then there would be no need for tftp services.
Once the iPXE kernel boots it then transfers FOG (the customized linux OS that captures and deploys images on the target computers) over the http protocol. That’s about 30MB of data for FOS.
FOS sends the images to the FOG server using the NFS protocol.
FOS is capturing an image it will send the image to the fog server over NFS, THEN connect via ftp to the FOG server to issue a move command to move the image from /images/dev/<mac_address> to /images/<image_name>. That’s it no files are ever sent over FTP, only a move command to have the server change the file pointer from one directory to the next. The FTP server is not used to deploy an image.
There is no advantage to use one FTP service over another. I won’t speak for the Developers, but there is no need to support any other FTP server than what is provided by default by the distro’s repository. All you really need is a stable FTP service. Again that is just my opinion, nothing more.
[edit] OK I see the OP was talking about tftp and not ftp, but my response is still the same. There is no advantage of an alternate tftp server over what is supplied via the linux repo.
-
@CpServiceSPb said in Fog, Atftpd, iPxe and Http as transort protocol !:
I read somewhere that atftpd is quicker and much functional.
Please provide the link or reference text so we know exactly what you read. Otherwise it’s not wise to discuss this.
As George explained nicely there can’t be much of an advantage to use atftpd over tftp-hpa because FOG is not using it much anyway!!! It’s only used for the very first step of PXE booting and from a technical point of view I don’t see that it can make much of a difference between atftpd and tftp-hpa (see the TFTP protocol as it’s name states is trivial and both deamons have to stick to that protocol).
And did I understand correctly that I can boot windows ISO (not only Linux) over network using FOG and tftpd-hpa?
Sure you can but speed-wise that wouldn’t be wise to do!! I get the impression that you are mixing things up here. You probably read something about using atftpd to server iPXE to a client which then uses HTTP to speedy load the ISO. BUT I don’t think it’s loading the ISO via HTTP from the atftpd server!!! You also need to setup a webserver (apache/nginx) to serve the ISO via HTTP. You can also do this on a FOG server because we are using apache for the web interface anyway. Simply put your ISO file in the right place and you can setup PXE ISO booting via HTTP.
-
@Sebastian-Roth said in Fog, Atftpd, iPxe and Http as transort protocol !:
Please provide the link or reference text so we know exactly what you read. Otherwise it’s not wise
to discuss this.If I find it again I will post it.
At now the main advantage, of using atftpd by my oppinion, is when it is already installed and set up and fully operational.
As in my case.
And it is not necessary to waste a lot of time to remove atftpd and install and set up tftp-hpa instead.
And of courcse, setting up of Http server is necessary to support http transmittion.
So, summarizing:- it is possible to use FOG with atftpd instead tftp-hpa, that is FOG is compatible with atftpd, is it ?
- Is FOG fully or partially compatible with atftpd ?
- it is not quite difficult to set up atftpd with FOG, is it ?
-
@CpServiceSPb from a strictly service understanding point of view, whether you use tftp-hpa or atftp, doesn’t matter. What does matter is that atftp be configured to use the same reference points for loading the data, or at the very least you make sure it’s configuration is pointing everything appropriately.
The thing presenting tftp is irrelevant. So what benefit over tftp-hpa does atftp provide? My guess is there is no benefit which is likely where @Sebastian-Roth is coming from here.
-
@CpServiceSPb basically it boils down to:
Fog is already written to install, configure, and enable tftp services using tftpd-hpa. Changing what’s doing tftp would require a lot of overhaul in terms of configuring and ensuring tftp is operational. Unless atftp has a significant advantage over tftp provided currently, there is no point in having us rework this portion of our installer.
