Doing this backwards. Is there any drawback?

[Fog_Newb]

https://wiki.fogproject.org/wiki/index.php/BIOS_and_UEFI_Co-Existence

Hello,

Instead of adding the additional vendor classes for UEFI boot (Windows DHCP). I instead set the default bootfile to ipxe.efi and added a policy for PXEClient:Arch:00000 to use undionly.kpxe. So far it is working fine. Is there a reason the instructions in the link do it the other way?

[Wayne Workman]

There is nothing wrong with the way you’re doing it. That particular wiki page is written the way it is because at the time, most people already had legacy booting setup on their DHCP servers. Back then, legacy network booting was much more common and UEFI booting were the edge cases. You’re welcome to update the article if you’d like (soon as the wiki is working again)

[Fog_Newb]

Thanks. Issue solved

[Fog_Newb]

@Wayne-Workman said in Doing this backwards. Is there any drawback?:

You’re welcome to update the article if you’d like

I would be happy to.

[Wayne Workman]

@Fog_Newb Send me your email address in a direct message (it’s the talk bubble in the top right), and I’ll get a wiki user created for you.