Michael Marschall said:
> As someone has already stated, if you use the same hardware
> configuration and features you do not need to worry about mac
> addresses. In some cases if you use different hardware and the same
> features you again will *often* not have to worry about mac addresses.
>
> Michael
>
Okay thanks!
This really rocks my boat :)
I'll try and pull of large networks with this, if it works I'll post
hardware/network requirements to this list.
dP
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, dP wrote:
>
>> > No offense but this sounds like you want someone to tell you how to
>> > setup a solution that you have been asked to do.
>> >
>> > Michael
>> >
>>
>> No not really, I know how I want the solution to be (although I've
>> already changed my mind a few times thx to this list), I just need to
>> know if it is possible using current tools (linux) and cheap hardware
>> (jammins).
>>
>> And so far the only bottleneck seems to be an issue with manual
>> per-workstation configuration (macadds) and network traffic.
>>
>> dP
>>
>>
>> > On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, dP wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have been reading up on diskless networks, and some of the ways
>> >> this works seems ludicrous to me.
>> >>
>> >> First of all, if you have large networks for schools, you want the
>> >> systems to be exactly equal. Furthermore, you (well, I) would want
>> >> a user-account for each student, managed by their teachers (I'll
>> >> use LDAP or something), so when the user login through xdm, it
>> >> automaticly mounts the home directory via nfs (this does not have
>> >> to be fast). A few nice benefits:
>> >>
>> >> The entire root of the ws' would be alike, no changes are wanted so
>> >> it's a simply nfs ro export (home directory mounted seperately from
>> >> nfs server on X login). This means that you need only one standard
>> >> nfs export for all workstations, which also makes updating/changes
>> >> very easy (I'd use devfs and mounting /var to local ram and linking
>> >> /tmp to /var/tmp as suggested).
>> >>
>> >> And when I say alike, I mean it, stuff like ~/GNUstep (for
>> >> windowmaker, dunno what it's called in icewm, or whatever) would
>> >> simply be symlinks to directories on the ro root.
>> >>
>> >> This makes it possible to put the whole root system in a ramdisk on
>> >> the server (just 1GB max) - so what's the big deal about fast
>> >> harddiscs??? On boot the server would simply extract a tarball to
>> >> the ramdisk. And think about this: 1GB ram is cheaper than many
>> >> super-fast-hd's.
>> >>
>> >> Please note that all hardware configurations will be similar (I'm
>> >> thinking: http://www.disklessworkstations.com - seems fast enough
>> >> for a client, right? though the quantity pricing isn't very big (75
>> >> max? I'm thinking what's the catch with these systems).
>> >>
>> >> And now to the irritating part, why oh why do you need to type in
>> >> the mac- address in a configuration file. Isn't the whole point of
>> >> DHCP to assign it a random IP automaticly? Since all workstations
>> >> would have no bootup independent stuff, I cannot see the usage of
>> >> static IP and hostname assignment. Is it possible to implement a
>> >> new configuration scheme where the configuration file would simply
>> >> contain an IP-range, and then it would automaticly assign a new ip
>> >> and hostname (maybe based on the mac-address)? I just think that
>> >> hardcoding mac-adds is lame, and it would remove the... automatic
>> >> feel of it all.
>> >>
>> >> I'd very much like to know.
>> >>
>> >> I would be willing to donate money for someone to implement this
>> >> (if it's not already there, God I'd sound lame then, but it didn't
>> >> look like it in the docs) and build a woody package of it ;)
>> >> However, I will not be payed until completion, so it would be out
>> >> of my own pocket which have many holes (otherwise I'd not say yes
>> >> to a project like this, but u know how it is).
>> >>
>> >> Anyways, my real question is this (for the server):
>> >> What kind of hardware architecture would you use if there was say,
>> >> 500 to 1000 workstations (and is it even possible with that many?).
>> >> What about RAM, how many GB is required? I read somewhere that more
>> >> than one cpu wouldn't mean a heck of a lot and probably make things
>> >> worse, I happen to agree with that (this is something that needs to
>> >> be stable for at least 10 years, by using ram-systems I hope this
>> >> can happen). But as to the architecture, uh, I only know i386, all
>> >> those fancy words (like alpha) have just been dreams until now...
>> >> Can anybody recommend anything (doesn't need to be cheap, but not
>> >> mainframe-priced either :) links to shops and useful information
>> >> would also be nice.
>> >>
>> >> As to the network, 1Gbit from server to switches, 100Mbit from
>> >> switches to workstations, this would be okay lowcost. And I'm
>> >> thinking compressing the X data, albeit this would introduce
>> >> greater load on the server.
>> >>
>> >> As to the software, imagine that all clients would run 1280x1024x16
>> >> (1024x764 would be acceptable, but...), and hmm, I don't know, say
>> >> a custom icewm with openoffice1 and mozilla1.1. I know that these
>> >> two apps are cpu- intensive, but I cannot for the life of me think
>> >> about something else that would do for education and old windows
>> >> lusers (no not opera, and thats final and just me). Note that
>> >> mozilla would also be having plugins for java and flash...
>> >>
>> >> I'm very nervous about this, as I have never build such... grand
>> >> networks, I've build my own linux systems from scratch (not LFS)
>> >> sure, and I've optimized everything for everything on our
>> >> webhosting servers, but this is very upscale for me, however, being
>> >> a Linux freak, I have to do this myself, it's simply to great a
>> >> temptation (imagine that you were hired to build linux networks
>> >> like this, and not only build, replace windoze machines ;)
>> >>
>> >> Anyways, the diskless scheme seems superior to me, I just hope that
>> >> the servers can handle that many workstations... well, they _have_
>> >> to.
>> >>
>> >> dP
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________________________
>> >>
>> >> Sponsored by:
>> >> ThinkGeek at http://www.ThinkGeek.com/
>> >> _____________________________________________________________________
>> >> Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs,
>> >> goto:
>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
>> >> For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on
>> >> irc.openprojects.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------->>
> Bringing you mounds of caffeinated joy
>> >>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf <<<
>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
>> For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.openprojects.net
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------->
> Bringing you mounds of caffeinated joy
> >>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf <<<
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
> For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.openprojects.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bringing you mounds of caffeinated joy
>>> http://thinkgeek.com/sf <<<
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.openprojects.net
