=================== BUG #1644: LATEST MODIFICATIONS ================== http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=1644&group_id=68
Changes by: Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 2002-Nov-22 11:24 (GMT) ------------------ Additional Follow-up Comments ---------------------------- As I see it there are two ways: 1) Abuse tftp (RFC1350) 2) use RUDP (RDP) (RFC1151) (not to be mistaken with Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) from the evil empire) The 1st is probably easier to do (lot's of the code is already in) but ugly from a softdesign prospective. The 2nd would be be harder to implement. No other concerns at the moment. =================== BUG #1644: FULL BUG SNAPSHOT =================== Submitted by: nagilum Project: GNU GRUB Submitted on: 2002-Nov-08 11:27 Category: Network Severity: Ordinary Priority: Low Bug Group: Feature Request Resolution: None Assigned to: None Status: Open Release: Reproducibility: Every Time Planned Release: Summary: remote (network) controllable bootmenu Original Submission: I'm using Wake-On-LAN to power on my machine and I'm able to power down it again using halt -p under linux for example. However what I can't do is to remotely select a different operating system (well I can log into my linux box modify the menu.lst and rebootm but I have no access to it from FreeBSD for example, I'm using reiserfs) As there is already basic networking in, terminal code in (for serial control) I think it should be easy to make config options to allow connections from a specified host/network at a defined port. Then I could telnet there (I know plaintext.., but I trust my network) and use the menu as with the serial console, nothing fancy.. I think this would make GRUB the first choice bootmanager for all WOL guys. Follow-up Comments ******************* ------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2002-Nov-22 11:24 By: nagilum As I see it there are two ways: 1) Abuse tftp (RFC1350) 2) use RUDP (RDP) (RFC1151) (not to be mistaken with Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) from the evil empire) The 1st is probably easier to do (lot's of the code is already in) but ugly from a softdesign prospective. The 2nd would be be harder to implement. No other concerns at the moment. ------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2002-Nov-08 17:20 By: okuji This has already been discussed several times in bug-grub. Unfortunately, I cannot find my own message about this from the archive, so I say the same thing once again: Please design a good and simple protocol. You must consider that UDP packets can disappear by accident. Thanks, Okuji CC list is empty No files currently attached For detailed info, follow this link: http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=1644&group_id=68 _______________________________________________ Bug-grub mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-grub