Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site ucbvax.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!tcp-ip From: tcp-ip@ucbvax.ARPA Newsgroups: fa.tcp-ip Subject: Re: tftp for bootstrap Message-ID: <8845@ucbvax.ARPA> Date: Sun, 7-Jul-85 21:50:25 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8845 Posted: Sun Jul 7 21:50:25 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 8-Jul-85 05:26:27 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA Organization: University of California at Berkeley Lines: 22 From: sun!l5!gnu@BERKELEY (John Gilmore) I personally don't see much point in using tftp as a boot protocol UNLESS it will talk to existing servers. We might as well use our existing "nd" protocol if the only thing it will ever talk to is other Suns. The responses I've gotten tend strongly toward the "we did it kinda that way and it has worked for N years" type of stories, which are OK but not much help. I guess what I'm looking for is a good reason to boot with TFTP (nobody has yet said "we did it another way and are really sorry"), and some help in designing the protocol above TFTP (the file name, how we find the server), to let it interoperate with other Internet machines with minimal or no effort. It seems like the war stories all describe schemes where a custom boot server exists (maybe running TFTP but not the way it's spec'd for everybody, eg odd port #, odd file types). Can I focus this discussion to answer a specific question? What does YOUR system's TFTP server do with a file name in a RRQ which does not have any pathname delimiters? Reply to me (sun!gnu@Berkeley.arpa) and I'll summarize to the list.