• Recent
    • Unsolved
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. NTex
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 2
    • Posts 15
    • Best 1
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    NTex

    @NTex

    1
    Reputation
    1
    Profile views
    15
    Posts
    0
    Followers
    0
    Following
    Joined Last Online

    NTex Unfollow Follow

    Best posts made by NTex

    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421
      Fixed the previous post, I was having issues uploading files directly on forums.

      Attached screenshot from iLO that gives me the view / control on the client:
      alt text

      I attached both captures.
      Fog Server Capture
      WAN Side / Server

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex

    Latest posts made by NTex

    • RE: Adding ESXi to Fog Server

      @ntex
      Nevermind, I’m too tired clearly, fixed the original configuration has another prefix= to empty.
      So this line was creating a conflict with one above.

      3195ca99-f8a5-45c8-b390-a2ad984f0f78-image.png

      Time to rest for today. 😊 long day, thanks anyways!!

      posted in General Problems
      NTexN
      NTex
    • Adding ESXi to Fog Server

      Hi,

      Read some topics on this:
      Using FOG to PXE boot into your favorite installer images
      iPXE Setup For Many OS’s Under BIOS and UEFI
      Booting VMware ESXi in iPXE

      But I’m dealing with weird error, I decided to use HTTP after NFS not working, but it’s not this either probably:

      kernel http://${fog-ip}/os/esxi/6.7u3/efi/boot/bootx64.efi -c http://${fog-ip}/os/esxi/6.7u3/efi/boot/boot.cfg
      

      5d474660-e5be-4463-a165-1c0129bba6c6-image.png

      What I don’t understand is if I set prefix to:

      prefix=http://10.200.0.67/os/esxi/6.7u3/
      

      Why after booting into ESXi installer the path changes to path used on menu for Boot Installer files ?

      http://10.200.0.67/os/esxi/6.7u3/efi/boot
      

      Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

      posted in General Problems
      NTexN
      NTex
    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421

      Awesome!

      BTW, little off-topic do you know why I had issues initially to upload on forum?
      Was due to the fact fresh user account and low reputation?

      Now I tested seems fine.

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex
    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421 said in Proliant ML110G7:

      @NTex Good going. Now I did work on a project to turn a Windows server into a FOG storage node. Once I proved that it worked I dropped the project because, why?? I have it documented here: https://forums.fogproject.org/topic/6941/windows-server-as-fog-storage-node-proof-of-concept-blog

      I realize this is a one off situation but if you need it then use it. But I think the fragmentation or what ever is going on with your MPLS circuit will be a problem when you get to the imaging point because FOG uses NFS to transfer the file from the FOG server to FOS Linux running on the target computer. Having a storage node at the remote sites might be the better solution if you can’t image over your WAN connection.

      So it might be the actual MTU and fragmentation, probably just happens for this old NIC and on these locations, who knows.

      Come to think about it, theses sites are kind located more on country side, far from big cities, where usually ISP have more issues like this due to distance / infrastructure, etc.

      Working Server, one of those I didn’t had issues, capture file
      Has no fragmentation, right ?

      I mean you see loading it fine here:
      alt text

      I think (at least I) learned something, MTU can cause issues like this.

      I wish I would had this idea sooner, using another workstation with portable TFTP Server while keeping the same DHCP, just had to change Option 66 to point to the Workstation.
      I actually copied ALL the PXE files from our Fog.

      I can use this workaround for 4 locations, and saved us couple thousand miles of driving and replace the servers physically, at least for now.

      Nevertheless, I will keep your special version that you compiled for me.

      Brainstorming this puzzle with you was a pleasure, thanks for all the help you gave and support, truly awesome. @george1421

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex
    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421 said in Proliant ML110G7:

      @NTex Ok here is a “special” version of undionly.kpxe https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XYe4SsM0ZLiJae1paIb8PFDnPVV0M3D7/view?usp=sharing

      Once loaded it will ignore any direction given by dhcp and request default.ipxe from 10.200.0.67 over the tftp protocol. Once that file is loaded it will then switch to http.

      Well now that I think about it, the default undionly.kpxe would work too (ugh) as long as you bring over default.ipxe to your tftpd64 server too. THAT file points directly at your FOG server. I didn’t think far enough ahead in the process. That makes this special undonly.kpxe not that special.

      Yes, you’re right 🙂

      While you were compiling your project, I did this:

      Copied the portable tftp64.
      Then I copied ALL files from Fog Server located at /tftpboot.

      I saw the boot file being loaded, immediately
      alt text

      I captured the event using local tftpd nevertheless, if you want to look at it 🎯
      Capture using local tftpd

      Once Fog Menu loaded, I selected my “Install CentOS” option and it’s loading:
      alt text

      Still I download your special version, might be useful in future ?

      I’m going to try now on server that I know it worked before to see if we see the MTU fragmentation to prove, if this was the root-cause.

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex
    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421 said in Proliant ML110G7:

      @NTex said in Proliant ML110G7:

      f I do from this very server (OS terminal) i do the command of tftp to our fog server to download undionly.kpxe and does no problem.

      But in this case you are using the OS’ tftp client, where when you are pxe booting you are using the nic card’s PXE rom that contains the tftp client. I don’t remember HP servers, but I know Dell and you can update the bios, but that doesn’t necessary mean you update the NIC firmware. Through the lifecycle controller the NIC and RAID firmware is a separate install.

      Yes, there is a difference between client and PXE.
      I checked HPE all these servers have the latest NIC firmware.
      I mean these servers are pretty old! 🙂

      They release packages to patch on Linux, so I’ve done all that in the past.

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex
    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421 said in Proliant ML110G7:

      Just to confirm your fog server is at 10.200.0.67? Once iPXE gets loaded and running it access the FOG server over http which is a bit more WAN friendly than tftp.

      Yes, that’s the IP.

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex
    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421

      Yes, I noticed the MTU is smaller on this location, so gets 106 bytes on 2nd window.
      These WAN links are all Fiber 20 mbps, minimum.
      Might be due to VPN, using part of MTU though.

      My thoughts were always towards to I wonder if it’s actually the card firmware might be bogus and doesn’t load the bootfile, but is the same version for the working servers.

      And like I said on initial post, if I do from this very server (OS terminal) i do the command of tftp to our fog server to download undionly.kpxe and does no problem.

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex
    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421

      So I can deploy like tftpd64 server on Windows client and then change my DHCP to get that client instead and capture all the action ?
      Would it work ?

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex
    • RE: Proliant ML110G7

      @george1421

      Yes, you’re right I start capturing before the actual bootp.
      Problem was using capture on Appliance.

      This capture was on Switch port where the actual server is connected, so you will see a lot more traffic.

      iLO IP is .2 and gateway .254.

      See if this has what you want I filtered to dhcp I saw option 594 or something.

      Thanks

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      NTexN
      NTex