[quote=“Walter Wahlstedt, post: 5448, member: 1441”]Could you give a little more indepth information on how to implement your patch?[/quote]
First you need some kind of http authentication with apache. After that everbody who logs in over apache needs a user in Fog with his username and the static password FogREMOTEUSER.
btw: if this part is being reworked it would be nice to have one multicast-group for each job. And not one group for all jobs 
[quote=“Btheman, post: 3108, member: 683”]I used the same filesystem after reformatting of ext3 and it worked. Well if I try using LVM for the /images directory again I will try to work through it.[/quote]
I strongly suggest using ext4 instead of ext3!
No, it’s not correct…
Should work with LVM. I assume your error lies in the filesystem options. Maybe the wrong fs or no large file support active?
[quote=“falko, post: 1711, member: 48”]haha must have been good enough then, so all i have to change is [COLOR=#000000][COLOR=#dd0000]–half-duplex [COLOR=#000000]to[/COLOR] --full-duplex [COLOR=#000000]?[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]
i may just give that a test, cheers[/quote]
Have you tested it yet?
The DNS-Server isn’t assigned automatically - the FOG-Client only uses bootp for PXE-Boot and after that Kernel-DHCP.
If you need DNS inside the FOG-Client you can use the PXE_IMAGE_DNSADDRESS setting.
But I don’t know why your gateway is missing…
The FOG-Client only uses bootp and no dhcp…
Means: no dhcp -> no dns…
But I vote for adding real dhcp support for dhcp environments with dhcp snooping and dynamic arp inspection.
[quote=“falko, post: 1711, member: 48”]haha must have been good enough then, so all i have to change is [COLOR=#000000][COLOR=#dd0000]–half-duplex [COLOR=#000000]to[/COLOR] --full-duplex [COLOR=#000000]?[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]
i may just give that a test, cheers[/quote]
would be great to have the higher speed confirmed.
Setting it on the FOG-Server should be sufficient - it’s a udp-sender option and not udp-receiver 
[quote=“Kevin, post: 1720, member: 3”]So another question I have, for unicast, or imaging 1 device, is that set to half-duplex or is it set to full-duplex?[/quote]
Unicast is handled over nfs, not udp-sender
[quote=“falko, post: 1690, member: 48”]How much better does multicast perform after this change?[/quote]
mmh, it’s quite a while ago that I tested it - don’t know any numbers anymore but it was enough to say that I will patch the files after each release again
I can’t test it currently because we’ve upgraded our network and now the server and the clients are the bottleneck (5 GiB/min for Multicast and full 1 Gbit/s for NFS - with decompressing on the client).
[quote=“BryceZ, post: 1684, member: 2”]The problem with making that configurable is that it’s set in the boot image, which would need to be built for it. There are methods that could be used to pass this setting along from the web server to the boot image, but I don’t think it’s been considered a priority, and that would be a non-trivial change.[/quote]
ok, I understand that…
[quote=“BryceZ, post: 1684, member: 2”]
As for the half-duplex networks… there are some older network printers are statically set to half-duplex, and unfortunately not all businesses provide sufficient IT budgets for replacing devices that aren’t “broken”.[/quote]
we are talking about multicast
Every printer will surely slow down the transfer if igmp isn’t used etc.
The question was why anyone is using hubs and not switches.
[quote=“BryceZ, post: 1684, member: 2”]I would suggest that you make a feature request for the change… […][/quote]
or I will keep patching it by hand every release
[quote=“BryceZ, post: 1682, member: 2”]I could be wrong, but I think that was an attempt to make sure FOG would work with complex networks that might include half-duplex segments. If it was set to full-duplex and you tried to run across a half-duplex segment you’ll get duplex mismatch errors.[/quote]
ok, than it would be great to have that configurable.
btw: who has networks which are half-duplex anymore? I’m currently thinking about attaching my fogserver with 10 GbE…
[quote=“Kevin, post: 1655, member: 3”]Ah, never noticed that :), but who knows, this might be changed in version .33. However, the changes in the new version aren’t very well known. EXT4 support, Developer Tools etc, so time will tell if it changes :)[/quote]
half-duplex is still there in svn trunk
[quote=“Kevin, post: 1653, member: 3”]How are you able to tell that it’s running at half-duplex?[/quote]
See MulticastTask.class.php:
[PHP]$cmd = “gunzip -c “” . $this->getImagePath() . “” | " . UPDSENDERPATH . " --min-receivers " . $this->getClientCount() . " --portbase " . $this->getPortBase() . " " . $interface . " $wait --half-duplex --ttl 32 --nokbd”;
[/PHP]
[B]–half-duplex[/B]
Is there a reason why FOG uses only half-duplex? In my environment full-duplex performes better
A backup should be automated and no user driven (at least this is my opinion).
And you surely don’t want to transfer a few gigabytes to several hundred gigabytes images with a single web request
Hello,
has anybody tried jumbo frames for multicast deployment?
udpcast has some weird documentation and more weird code:
[QUOTE][B]blocksize[/B]
Choses the packet size. Default (and also maximum) is 1456.[/QUOTE]
[CODE]#if 0
if (net_config.blockSize > 1456) {
perror(“block size too large”);
exit(1);
}
#endif[/CODE]
In my opinion there is no need for LDAP-Authentication in FOG itself. Apache does authentication really fine
I’ve quickly written a patch for svn trunk. Any comments? What should be improved to get this into trunk?
btw: we have all computers and groups in LDAP (with GOSA) and made every edit-option for hosts/groups in FOG readonly… A script transfers all the data from LDAP to mysql…
[url=“/_imported_xf_attachments/0/48_remoteuser-patch.txt?:”]remoteuser-patch.txt[/url]