Re: [Etherboot-developers] Thinking PXE compatibility thoughts....

[<ebi...@ln...>]

Peter Lister <P.L...@sy...> writes:

> > I just took a look at syslinux and all it really uses is are the PXE
> > UDP functions, that are currently implemented for freebsd support.
> > Though I believe it uses the 16bit API entry points.
> 
> There's actually no particular reason AFAICS that syslinux needs to use
> pxe. It could be ported as an etherboot "menu module", to sit on top of
> Etherboot's drivers so that people who want syslinux behaviour can have
> a syslinux-in-firmware (which even has an IDE driver, dammit).

I don't even want to go into how bad I think in principle a syscall
layer in the firmware is, and it is definitely not something I would
design for.  But at the same time I think there is value in being
compatible, especially if it the implementation is trivial and has no
real maintenance burden.

> > So with a little care I think etherboot could implement pxe without
> > many changes.  The task list would look like:
> > 
> > The todo list would be:
> > - Working 16bit PXE/32bit PXE glue code.
> > - Working raw download driver.
> > - [optional] PXE hacked DHCP.
> > - [optional] PXE TFTP.
> > - [optional] PXE UNDI compatibility.
> 
> HPA has said that that the world needs a decent open source PXE
> implementation, and I'm inclined to agree, though possibly not for the
> same reasons.
> 
> I'd have said that UNDI is the most essential bit - that is why people
> *want* PXE, I perceive - nic independent booting. They tend to use "PXE"
> as shorthand for "nic independent network boot". They are looking for
> "network in the BIOS", not a lecture on the ways in which PXE is broken.

Give me a broader survey, but neither pxelinux nor the freebsd loader
use the UNDI layer.  And UNDI is an optional part of PXE for the
Itanium.  If an unmodified pxelinux would run under etherboot there
are plenty of people who would say that is PXE and not care about
the technical details.

> > Just in case someone is ambitious or has worries about shipping a
> > machine to someone who really wants PXE support.
> 
> I don't want PXE support as such  - I want open source firmware world
> domination, and supporting PXE is an important step on that road.
> Unbiased firmware which loads whatever environment is required to
> support the OS is the aim; LinuxBIOS and Adam Sulmicki's PC BIOS work
> can provide this for those who need an MS environments, and  EB with PXE
> allows them to boot from the net.

You want to take the torch on this one?  It is on my wishlist, but
I really don't have time to pursue any of this right now.

Eric