Ilo and Ilo2 virtual media throughput

[Bools]

This Rick from HP is irritating telling al the time that the problem is the network, bla bla bla, I think he never used iLO.
ilo IS SLOW , even if you are connected with a cross over cable without any switches.
HP iLO Engineers should sort this problems.
And Rick, stpo saying what you don't know properly.
Thanks

[rick jones]

I am sorry you don't think I have ever used iLO vMedia. I can assure you that I do use it on a regular basis installing Linux on BL860c, BL640c, rx2660, DL380 G5 and DL385 G2. I have used it on both WAN and LAN installs (99% LAN/Campus).

Yes it can be slow.

The reasons though can be quite varied, and not always the same from site to site, which is why getting a packet trace specific to the iLO(s) in question could be helpful.

[iloguy]

Based on my testings, iLO2 v1.50 is faster than v1.43 and even seems faster than iLO1 v1.92.
But, no matter what you do, iLO2 v1.50 CD/DVD-ROM won't give you more than 0.50Mb/sec average throughput.

[Justin Grote]

I see about the same results iloguy, there is definitely a bottleneck somewhere in the code.

[MarkE_2]

i would say for ILO 2 v1.50 is the first useable firmware version for use with Virtual Media.

Its only taken over a year to get there !
(and its still not perfect)

[JimTaylor]

Not sure about that.

It doesn't seem as bad as some of the experiences of folks on here looking back through the thread but I did an install recently across a gigabit management network and it took a good few hours to install Windows Server 2003 R2 from a remotely mapped ISO image.

I guess if your datacenter in on the other side of the planet or something, then you have no choice - but if it is in the same building, then not really worth using!

[JKytsi]

I think it's time to put this issue to rest. And hope that the future will bring improvements to the speed.