<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
    <channel>
        <title>Netboot feasible?</title>
        <description> Hello,

I have 3 old products in the series (2 Different Seagate GoFlex NAS series: 1 with 1x 3.5&amp;quot; bay, and 1 with 2x 2.5&amp;quot; bays; Also a NetGear Home NAS product with 2x tray-less 3.5&amp;quot; HDD bays - I forgot the name of it).

I have a PFsense router, which has a DHCP server capable of sending DHCP parameters required for netbooting. I also have 2 home lab servers running Proxmox, and the know-how to administer a Linux system from the command-line.

My main question is: is it possible to get these old NAS boxes to Netboot using only the available, onboard flash storage?
Secondary to that is: Is it worth the effort?

I realize the second question is subjective and more a matter of opinion. I&amp;#039;m just trying to gauge how much Ibuprofen I&amp;#039;m liable to need, so to speak.

Also, is anyone able to help me get started? If it&amp;#039;s possible to do, I can probably figure it out eventually. Some help from those more experienced would be great.

I have a rescue USB in one of the systems with an old RootFS. I&amp;#039;m not sure if it&amp;#039;ll be useful/needed. All 3 were converted to USB boot using instructions in these forums at one time.</description>
        <link>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137591#msg-137591</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Mar 2026 03:08:11 -0500</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Phorum 5.2.23</generator>
        <item>
            <guid>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137638#msg-137638</guid>
            <title>Re: Netboot feasible?</title>
            <link>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137638#msg-137638</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ &gt; Just to clarify, my reasoning for using an<br />
&gt; overlay-type filesystem was to eliminate having to<br />
&gt; clone the FS for each box, while allowing each box<br />
&gt; to have it&#039;s own &quot;scratch&quot; space for FS changes.<br />
&gt; That said, besides not knowing if it&#039;s possible to<br />
&gt; use the same Read-only base with multiple<br />
&gt; overlays, I&#039;m also not sure if such a filesystem<br />
&gt; would export correctly via NFS.<br />
<br />
What you are thinking is a typical flash-based system such as OpenWrt. The overlay FS on top are the configuration data for a specific box. <br />
<br />
For an NFS rootfs, that would not be necessary. In both approaches, you would have to clone a reference rootfs to start with. And then add in the specifics for a box.<br />
<br />
&gt; Since the Primary function of a NAS box is to<br />
&gt; facilitate File Sharing, I also suspect it<br />
&gt; wouldn&#039;t be very network-traffic efficient to boot<br />
&gt; a box via NFS, just to host it&#039;s own NFS &amp; SMB<br />
&gt; filesystem.<br />
<br />
Not really, each of a NAS box would have its own shared data hosted on a USB or SATA disk. The rootfs has notthing to do with the data partitions.<br />
<br />
&gt; Regardless of the &quot;hows&quot;, I still think it would<br />
&gt; be an interesting project to be able to manage<br />
&gt; multiple boxes from a single Command and Control<br />
&gt; Center.<br />
&gt; <br />
&gt; Perhaps a simple OS could be loaded into the flash<br />
&gt; storage, and be pre-setup to take commands from<br />
&gt; said C&amp;C Center. If the need to install packages<br />
&gt; were removed from the equation, then maybe a<br />
&gt; compressed filesystem, like squashfs could be used<br />
&gt; in flash storage to make better use of space.<br />
<br />
We are talking about a modern NAS where nothing else but the boot loader is on flash. So compressed file system is not applicable.<br />
<br />
Again, you are thinking flash-based systems. Which has a lot of limitation, e.g. flash space must be very large to be able to host a Debian rootfs.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>bodhi</dc:creator>
            <category>Rescue System</category>
            <pubDate>Sun, 02 Jun 2024 22:15:57 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137637#msg-137637</guid>
            <title>Re: Netboot feasible?</title>
            <link>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137637#msg-137637</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ Nice!<br />
<br />
Just to clarify, my reasoning for using an overlay-type filesystem was to eliminate having to clone the FS for each box, while allowing each box to have it&#039;s own &quot;scratch&quot; space for FS changes. That said, besides not knowing if it&#039;s possible to use the same Read-only base with multiple overlays, I&#039;m also not sure if such a filesystem would export correctly via NFS.<br />
<br />
Since the Primary function of a NAS box is to facilitate File Sharing, I also suspect it wouldn&#039;t be very network-traffic efficient to boot a box via NFS, just to host it&#039;s own NFS &amp; SMB filesystem.<br />
<br />
Regardless of the &quot;hows&quot;, I still think it would be an interesting project to be able to manage multiple boxes from a single Command and Control Center.<br />
<br />
Perhaps a simple OS could be loaded into the flash storage, and be pre-setup to take commands from said C&amp;C Center. If the need to install packages were removed from the equation, then maybe a compressed filesystem, like squashfs could be used in flash storage to make better use of space. Config changes could be stored on the CCC, and read from/implemented by instructions in the RO flash storage.<br />
<br />
Probably all just a so-called &quot;Pipe dream&quot; though.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>aaronouthier</dc:creator>
            <category>Rescue System</category>
            <pubDate>Sun, 02 Jun 2024 18:31:20 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137636#msg-137636</guid>
            <title>Re: Netboot feasible?</title>
            <link>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137636#msg-137636</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ aaronouthier,<br />
<br />
&gt; I&#039;ve been thinking about this quite a bit. I&#039;m<br />
&gt; wondering now what files in a given rootfs release<br />
&gt; are specific to each box, and what files are<br />
&gt; universal? No need to answer that directly, I&#039;m<br />
&gt; just thinking.<br />
&gt; <br />
&gt; What would it take to have a &quot;universal&quot; rootfs<br />
&gt; base. If the kernel, initramfs/initrd, etc. and<br />
&gt; any unit specific files are stored directly in<br />
&gt; each specific unit&#039;s flash storage, could a<br />
&gt; generic, read only base filesystem be used,<br />
<br />
For Kirwood boxes, we already have a universal rootfs. That was my goal from the beginning when I start release the basic rootfs. Now the latest version is Debian-6.5.7-kirkwood-tld-1-rootfs-bodhi.tar.bz2.<br />
<br />
The only difference for each box is the DTB. Everything else is the same in my setup. So u-boot envs for each box would load the correct DTB separately (if new u-boot is supported, see <a href="https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?3,12381"  rel="nofollow">release thread</a>).  <br />
<br />
If it is a Kirkwood box with stock u-boot only, then the DTB is embbed inside uImage. And that is also the only difference in the rootfs.<br />
<br />
&gt;  with<br />
&gt; say a unionfs or overlayfs or similar - all over<br />
&gt; NFS? I don&#039;t know enough about unionfs or<br />
&gt; overlayfs to know if a common base can be used<br />
&gt; multiple times. If not, a tarball could be<br />
&gt; deployed for each unit, I suppose.<br />
<br />
No need to use any overlayfs scheme, for the reason I described above.<br />
<br />
For a while, I actually run the same NFS rootfs (starting with one and clone it to 4 other Kirkwood boxes of various types, eg. GF Net, GF Home, Pogo E02, Pogo V4, Dockstar). In my kernel build farm, there are about 8-10 Kirkwood boxes running. Each of 5 of them running from its cloned NFS rootfs. To keep the rootfs exactly the same, I used DHCP to get the dynamic ip address from the router. For LED, I have a universal scripts to turn on/off LEDs depending on which board is running. The hostname is a bit cumbersome to automate, so they are manually edited. Perhaps someone reading this would propose a solution.<br />
<br />
After I acquired more powerful Kirkwood and Armada boxes, I no longer use these NFS booting boxes in the build farm.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>bodhi</dc:creator>
            <category>Rescue System</category>
            <pubDate>Sun, 02 Jun 2024 17:14:12 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137635#msg-137635</guid>
            <title>Re: Netboot feasible?</title>
            <link>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137635#msg-137635</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ A big thanks as always Bodhi! Apologies for not getting back to you guys sooner.<br />
<br />
I&#039;ve been thinking about this quite a bit. I&#039;m wondering now what files in a given rootfs release are specific to each box, and what files are universal? No need to answer that directly, I&#039;m just thinking.<br />
<br />
What would it take to have a &quot;universal&quot; rootfs base. If the kernel, initramfs/initrd, etc. and any unit specific files are stored directly in each specific unit&#039;s flash storage, could a generic, read only base filesystem be used, with say a unionfs or overlayfs or similar - all over NFS? I don&#039;t know enough about unionfs or overlayfs to know if a common base can be used multiple times. If not, a tarball could be deployed for each unit, I suppose.<br />
<br />
End goal: To create a WebUI management system for modern Linux to manage these old systems! The lack of CPU power, RAM, and flash storage, is their weak point now-a-day. There just isn&#039;t sufficient to run a full Web-based config system. However, if another, more modern linux box were available, I suspect it could be used to manage anywhere from 1 to a few dozen of these old systems. Serving up NFS or SMB shares doesn&#039;t require a boat load of resources - such services could be performed locally on each device, but actual management could be performed from a central management system.<br />
<br />
At least in theory and in my mind, the above is possible. Alas, I lack the knowledge and programming skills to accomplish such a feat. It is still find it to be a nice thought.<br />
<br />
I have seen a somewhat similar project concept, called NSpanel Manager, used with flashed Sonoff NSPanels:<br />
<a href="https://github.com/NSPManager/NSPanelManager"  rel="nofollow">https://github.com/NSPManager/NSPanelManager</a>]]></description>
            <dc:creator>aaronouthier</dc:creator>
            <category>Rescue System</category>
            <pubDate>Sun, 02 Jun 2024 16:36:34 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137592#msg-137592</guid>
            <title>Re: Netboot feasible?</title>
            <link>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137592#msg-137592</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ aaronouthier,<br />
<br />
<br />
&gt; My main question is: is it possible to get these<br />
&gt; old NAS boxes to Netboot using only the available,<br />
&gt; onboard flash storage?<br />
&gt; Secondary to that is: Is it worth the effort?<br />
&gt; <br />
&gt; I realize the second question is subjective and<br />
&gt; more a matter of opinion. I&#039;m just trying to gauge<br />
&gt; how much Ibuprofen I&#039;m liable to need, so to<br />
&gt; speak.<br />
<br />
It is quite painless. I think what you are looking for is NFS rootfs. <br />
<br />
<a href="https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?2,23630"  rel="nofollow">Wiki thread</a><br />
<blockquote class="bbcode"><div><small>Quote<br /></small><strong></strong><br />NFS <br />
<br />
NFS - HowTo set up NFS shares (and boot NFS rootfs), see also Debian 12 (bookworm) settings <br />
Boot your Dockstar (and other plugs) using NFS rootfs, see also Debian 12 (bookworm) settings <br />
Increase NFSD max_block_size <br />
Reduce NFS threads</div></blockquote>
<br />
And your Kirkwood boxes only need to have u-boot set up to load the kernel files from an NFS rootfs, and then the kernel will mount the  NFS rootfs and run on it.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>bodhi</dc:creator>
            <category>Rescue System</category>
            <pubDate>Sat, 25 May 2024 13:40:05 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
        <item>
            <guid>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137591#msg-137591</guid>
            <title>Netboot feasible?</title>
            <link>https://forum.doozan.com/read.php?4,137591,137591#msg-137591</link>
            <description><![CDATA[ Hello,<br />
<br />
I have 3 old products in the series (2 Different Seagate GoFlex NAS series: 1 with 1x 3.5&quot; bay, and 1 with 2x 2.5&quot; bays; Also a NetGear Home NAS product with 2x tray-less 3.5&quot; HDD bays - I forgot the name of it).<br />
<br />
I have a PFsense router, which has a DHCP server capable of sending DHCP parameters required for netbooting. I also have 2 home lab servers running Proxmox, and the know-how to administer a Linux system from the command-line.<br />
<br />
My main question is: is it possible to get these old NAS boxes to Netboot using only the available, onboard flash storage?<br />
Secondary to that is: Is it worth the effort?<br />
<br />
I realize the second question is subjective and more a matter of opinion. I&#039;m just trying to gauge how much Ibuprofen I&#039;m liable to need, so to speak.<br />
<br />
Also, is anyone able to help me get started? If it&#039;s possible to do, I can probably figure it out eventually. Some help from those more experienced would be great.<br />
<br />
I have a rescue USB in one of the systems with an old RootFS. I&#039;m not sure if it&#039;ll be useful/needed. All 3 were converted to USB boot using instructions in these forums at one time.]]></description>
            <dc:creator>aaronouthier</dc:creator>
            <category>Rescue System</category>
            <pubDate>Sat, 25 May 2024 13:12:43 -0500</pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
