I guess you can always run a cyclade server, slap a free version of Linux on the server to manage the console connections, honestly if your running in a data center you should already be doing that on top of iLO connections anyway.
This is the nature of Licensing. Welcome to the party. It sucks no matter what the actual issue is. For instance, it’s possible that HP is actually Licensing these features themselves and it’s required by their upstream manufacturer of the backplane chip to license each individual user for iLO. You never know with this BS.
You don’t own your hardware. You especially don’t own your software. I don’t know what the FOSS alternative would be unless there was like a libreBootserver with a libreILO type firmware.
This is a pathetic thing to do and I do not want anyone to think it is in any shape or form OK, acceptable or tolerable. Hardware is the money maker, not this bullshit. The server cost ~40k at the time, this license bollocks is a few hundred over the years. The inconvenience introduced will not, ever, pay off in the long run.
Yeah, I never let one out the door sales wise wo/ a enterprise iDRAC. It pays for itself ONCE in man hours lost when you have to drive out to a site at 1am!!!
Also fuck your company for not buying the license. It should be a mandatory purchase. Not that I’m a fan of licensing on this shit but still, if you’re gonna get a server remote mgmt should be part of that cost of purchase.
Also fuck your company for not buying the license.
It’s worse than that. It was bought, as I’ve found out, but never applied. Naturally - lost to the whims of time.
It should be a mandatory purchase. Yes, but my issue is with this requiring the license in the first place. It’s just so petty and pathetic. There’s no technical barrier getting in the way - it’s the bloody suits looking for a payday.
I completely agree that there shouldn’t be all sorts of a la carte expenses and licenses. It’s horrible for the sake of organization, trickle expenses for “renewals” because it turns into a subscription eventually, etc.
At the same time it’s the reality and has been for a long time.
It isn’t just hp that plays this game, but still - fuck hpe.
It shouldn’t even be a mandatory purchase of a license. There shouldn’t be any license needed around the OOB controller, and in the past there never was. You wanted an OOB controller, you paid for the hardware and that was that.
I don’t think that’s entirely correct depending on what you call the “past”, I have an HP server that is about 10-15 years old that I cant use iLO after post because of the same message. They have charged for OOB management for years, but I think it was rolled into support contracts. This server was from an old job and iLO worked when it was dcommed
It’s correct based on my timeframe in IT 😂. Call me old but just because they’ve been doing as long as you remember doesn’t make it right. I remember a time when that wasn’t the case.
HP has been doing it for at least 20 years, I remember doing HW scans to send for contract renewals and I’m almost positive that included iLO licensing. Back then it was a “luxury” because we still had most of our servers on prem and could walk up to the KVM if needed. But, maybe you’re talking about back before that time.
However, I agree, it doesn’t make it right, but it also doesn’t mean it hasn’t been done for a long time.
Yep. The last server I had that didn’t require iLO advanced was a Pentium 4-class xeon, and the iLO was a PCI card with extra cables to route standby power, keyboard, mouse, and the reset and soft-power switches. If I’m not mistaken, iLO 2.
iLO (HP branding) is a remote access service to a server that allows one to control said server. A completely separate circuit - a really neat thing. One of such controls is a remote console - you can connect to a server miles away as if you had a keyboard and screen attached to it locally. What HP has done was build the functionality, but disable it once the server has booted.
Yes, it is. To the point of pict-rs not being able to read or access your instance icon, resulting in a server 500 error; nothing will work, until you update the row entry for site=1 icon in psql DB for Lemmy.
But nah, everything in the Lemmy software world is great, right?
Thanks for this, I’m working on setting up a personal instance in my k8s cluster and there are some parts that I’ve yet to fully understand so I’m hoping your working config can point me in the right direction
This is great, my NAS is 10Gig and I hate having to wait to download a movie from it so I can do some remuxing. Already placed my order for the u7 pro which was posted to the unifi store yesterday. Already have the BE200 on the way to upgrade my laptops.
That’s great! I only have a 200mbps connection and my home lab will not even saturate the 100mbps speed I get over wifi at the moment. I guess it could, but if I make a full backup, I’ll plug into Ethernet for a while.
Another telecom started servicing my building. I currently have about a year left on my contract and I plan to switch as they offer a faster symmetrical connection. I could get them before, but they were not allowed to offer anything higher than 20mbps. So, as long as that cap is lifted I am switching over.
Spoilers: it won’t: noisy neighbours, congested bands, and actual real world mean getting more than what we are already getting is next to impossible. Because basically those same factors are holding back even top speeds of wifi5, nevermind 6/6E
And how many devices even are on 80MHz nevermind the 160? Essentially the bands are too tight, with too few channels already, so wider channels aren’t going to help that either
All my devices are already WiFi 6 compatible I really like beam forming my old router didn’t have this and I could tell the difference right away as I live in a apt speed and signal is way better.
Raising the maximum possible raises the average as well. Not at the same rates, but there will definitely be improvements in the less visible bits like error correction, accounting for echo, etc.
I’ve not heard of Shannon’s law, but if you’re referring to Shannon-Hartley theorem then, from my brief understanding, wifi 7 will still bring improvements in bandwidth purely from doubling the channel width. Doubling the number of antennas is probably not going to affect home users as those will probably be prohibitively expensive, but enterprise might snatch it up - who knows.
Increasing the antenna availability increases available airtime in a given band, reducing the airtme 'load' of IoT and similar devices on the spectrum. This alone would be a dramatic improvement, but increasing the modulation by a factor of 4 should dramatically reduce airtime utilization for normal client loads, regardless of available upstream bandwidth, resulting in more airtime for everyone else and dramatically improving wifi performance in congested environments, assuming access points are designed with sufficient memory to allow for buffering frames in this manner.
Wifi7 should be as big an improvement as 11b to 11g, assuming the hardware vendors don't shit the bed on it.
graybeard
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.