Re: Rack mounted backend ideas
On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 09:09, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 04:18, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 02:15, Lee W wrote:
> > > > It is also more
> > > > "space appropriate" to do this headless than to go with a separate
> > > > traditional box/monitor/keyboard, so long as I'm not walking into more
> > > > headaches than I can guess at at present.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hi Mark,
> > >
> > > Given that you are putting all this in a rack, Have you considered using a
> > > KVM switch, such as those supplied by Belkin. You would then only need a
> > > single Keyboard, Monitor & Mouse for all of your PC's, this would get around
> > > any potential problems you may have with serial as well as providing a
> > > backup means of using your machines in the event that serial input fails.
> >
> > That, and you can run X or text mode (with all attendant benefits)
> > native to each box at full wire speed, which is much faster than the
> > 115Kbps (or is the console restricted to 19.2Kbps?) serial speed
[snip]
> My understanding is that the serial speed can be set to what the
> hardware can support, but don't think that will be the only connection
But the serial h/w can only support 115Kbps.
> among the computers - they will be bound by Ethernet. The serial line is
> only because the boot loaders only support serial as a way of connecting
> from another device - once the kernel and networking are up, they will
> be on the local Ethernet backbone as the method of interaction.
What boot loader only supports serial console??
Personally, I'm very happy using KVM...
--
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr. mailto:ron.l.johnson@cox.net |
| Jefferson, LA USA http://members.cox.net/ron.l.johnson |
| |
| "Basically, I got on the plane with a bomb. Basically, I |
| tried to ignite it. Basically, yeah, I intended to damage |
| the plane." |
| RICHARD REID, who tried to blow up American Airlines |
| Flight 63 |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
Reply to: