Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 26 Aug 1998 09:29:51 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Doug Ambrisko <ambrisko@whistle.com>
To:        hohmuth@innocent.com (Michael Hohmuth)
Cc:        luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it, ambrisko@whistle.com, tege@matematik.su.se, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Netboot
Message-ID:  <199808261629.JAA24376@whistle.com>
In-Reply-To: <87hfz010ph.fsf@olymp.sax.de> from Michael Hohmuth at "Aug 26, 98 12:44:58 pm"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael Hohmuth writes:
| Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> writes:
| 
| > a few questions to those who have looked at this code:
| >     1) which cards does etherboot support ?
| 
| The same cards that Netboot also supports, plus the Intel EtherExpress
| card.

.. and more from http://www.slug.org.au/etherboot/:

	However NIC support is limited to NE2000s/NE1000s (and PCI versions),
	some Western Digital/SMD cards (80x3, 8216, 8416), a few 3Com cards 
	(3c503, 3c507, 3c509), Lance based cards (such as the NE2100, NI6510 
	and PCI versions), the NI5210, the Crystal Semiconductor CS89X0 and 
	the Intel Etherexpress Pro

Note the "Netboot" project http://www.han.de/~gero/netboot.html supports
packet drivers so more NIC's can be used.  The main author of Etherboot
is starting on a project that would use Linux NIC drivers called Nilo.

| >     2) how hard would it be to make etherboot compilable under FreeBSD ?
| 
| You would have to duplicate some of Linux's /usr/include/linux header
| files.

Technically we should remove the Linux kernel PCI code.  Stephan has offered
to help.  Then we should be able to nuke the Linux includes.

| >     3) what "nice features" are you referring to except the 100Mbit
| >        support ? about last 1yr ago we managed to make netboot get all
| >        of its data from bootpd without having the annoying TFTP
| >        configuration file -- that was in my opinion a significant
| >        improvement.
| 
| I don't know what Doug referred to here, but what do you have against
| TFTP?

First I hate the TFTP file.  It is annoying as Luigi said.  I'm netbooting
some FreeBSD boxes via ISC's dhcpd.  I can put all configuration info in
the dhcpd.conf.  It's simplier for me.  Of course this is my opinion.

Features that I like:
      -	Being able to configure a boot menu to solect what mode to boot
	(ie. pick 1 for FreeBSD, 2 for Linux, 3 for Floppy).  Also you
	can specify a default and timeout.
      - Booting a device which can be a floppy or hard disk partition.
      - Boot an netboot rom image.  This is good for testing a 
	change to a netboot rom image without burning or writting to 
	a floppy.
      - Minor but nice, is a rom loader that can be prepended to a rom
	and dd'ed to a floppy.
      - Booting "Netboot" stuff from the "Netboot" project such as floppy
	image booter.
      - Uses TFTP to load the kernel instead of NFS.  This is useful for
	netbooting off a box that doesn't have NFS.  What use is this?
	Well we use it here for installation and some tools.  We make 
	a netboot image that has a built in MFS so it doesn't need 
	swap or root via NFS.  This also means the same dhcpd config can
	be trivially used for a bunch of machines.  (Also the way the
	DEC/Alpha does netboot via BOOTP & TFTP).
      - Does BOOTP extended options.  Not sure about how it works
	but it permits further options to be passed that exceed the
	initial packet length by sending them in another packet.

One problem I have is that the Etherboot code is that when the option to
boot from a hard disk partion, Win98 will fail.  This also occured when
you selected not to boot from network.  This has been fixed in the FreeBSD
version so I pulled over the patches for Etherboot and now it works.  My
patches are on the "Etherboot" web site.  I also fixed a couple of buffer
copy issues that truncated the bootp packet.  However I have not been able
to fix the boot from a partition option.  I assume the problem is similar
to the "do not netboot" option but I don't know enough about booting a
hard-drive yet.

It would be nice if all this work could converge into a more unified effort.
However, I doubt it.  Atleast the cross-pollination has improved things. 
Currently that I know off we have:
      -	NetBSD netboot
      - FreeBSD netboot
      - Netboot
      - Etherboot
      - Grub (soon)
      - Commercial netboot roms (which by the way are becoming standard
	on a lot of PC's shipped with a NIC such as Dell/Gateway) also
	Intel has published a spec on them here's some info on an annoucement
	from to the netboot mailing list.

	From: Marc VUILLEUMIER STUCKELBERG
                         Linux loader for PXE (NetPCs)

	   We ported BpBatch, the tools described in the Linux Remote-boot
	   mini-Howto, to Intel Preboot Execution Environment (PXE).
	   That means, you can now use it with most onboard bootproms
	   to load Linux, to manage disk images and to authenticate users
	   at boot time.

	   To our knowledge, PXE bootproms providers are Intel, Incom and 
	   Lanworks (eg. 3com). We hope that NILO will soon be PXE-compliant 
	   so that we get free Linux NetPC !

	   For more informations about PXE, read http://www.intel.com/managedpc/
	   For more informations about bpbatch, see 
	        http://cuiwww.unige.ch/info/pc/remote-boot/

It seems we could get a big bang for the buck by making a loader 
for the Commercial rom's or PXE compliant to boot the various OS's.  It 
would also be nice to make a "free" commercial compatable rom.  This way
Dell etc. would ship FreeBSD or whatever netboot'able machines.  Installation
via netboot are cool.  The entire installation and network setup can 
be automated making installation trivial and we get around the 1.4M boot
floppy restriction.  We commonly boot a 3.5M MFS kernel to do our automated
installs.

Doug A.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199808261629.JAA24376>