3 ms·
Oh, yes, absolutely - fair point. It was more the remote power/boot/install process which seems unnecessarily complicated these days compared to serial. An el
by blipvert 2y ago
Oh, yes, absolutely - fair point.
It was more the remote power/boot/install process which seems unnecessarily complicated these days compared to serial.
An elegant weapon for a more civilised age, or something ;-)
- BobbyTables2 2y agoIndeed, but iLO virtual media performance (at least used to be) so slow that it was silly. Booting a live cd or installing windows at 1MByte/s speeds (late 1990s CDROMs were faster!) is horribly slow. Maybe iLO5 was a bit better. usually found it easier (but annoying) to just walk over with a USB drive…
- jasomill 2y agoAgreed — installing modern Windows from physical DVD-R media is painful enough. I've found iLO 4 virtual media support most useful for booting DOS-hosted firmware updates supplied as El Torito ISO images that aren't natively bootable from USB flash in a world where you can no longer find CD-R blanks at every corner drug store, and where newer machines commonly lack the legacy BIOS support required to boot the image at all. It's also a fine way to boot minimal BSD or Linux rescue/netinstall images that don't involve live-booting a full desktop environment, or for installing smallish OSes like ESXi in cases where trading increased wallclock time for slightly reduced effort is justifiable.
- BuildTheRobots 2y agoIf you use the web (or older java) console to share the ISO as a virtual drive then it tends to be dog slow. If you SSH into the iLO then you can point the virtual CD drive at a HTTP web server hosting the image which seems to be significantly quicker to read. It uses HTTP range requests for random IO too, so doesn't need to pre-read the entire ISO.