A lot of the VM benefit comes from having a portable image virtual drive (ignoring being able to make one computer turn into 5+ at once, for now) because it's easy to grab a VM file and move it, unlike Windows. But does anyone remember the days of mapping a drive to a server with a DOS boot disk and xcopy'ing the files to or from the computer? No ghost, no sysprep, no pagefiles, and no 1.2GB basic OS install - just copy copy boom you're done. When I moved a Win98 file from my workstation to the lab (98 fits on a CD), made 4 copies and in a few minutes had running clones, it reminded me of those days... *sigh* Rich
-----Original Message----- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 7:32 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC's on VMWare I also wonder if the virtualization platforms are a dead end race. Looking at the newer 64-bit-for-Windows systems, many of the vendors are building partitioning into the hardware platform - where speed ceases to be an issue. However, that still has the minimum 1 CPU per partition limitation, at this point. I wonder if it would be possible to build a hardware level abstraction layer that does what the software virtualization platforms do now. I wonder if that kind of technology is somewhere in the pipeline.... -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. > -----Original Message----- > From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:20 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC's on VMWare > > > I am not saying VMWare isn't very cool. I enjoy it immensely. Just > indicating the limitations for Windows support. I think > anyone who would > consider using a product in a production environment in a way > that isn't in > the end completely supported by the people with the source > code are slightly > insane. However my view of production may be slightly > different and more > critical than others. > > I would like to see MS actually add VMWare to the HCL > certification process > and lists. I think that would be a good way to tackle it and > probably the > right way, they certify specific versions and don't even have > to worry about > underlying hardware, VMWare has to worry about that. However, > realistically, > I don't see it happening. If they hadn't gotten into the > virtualization > business I don't think they would have had much choice for > much longer, but > they did and some of us just said, duh, about time. > > Yes I would like to a very stripped down OS with the guests > running on it > like ESX. They may be thinking about that but more likely > right now they are > thinking about how closely they can tie it to the guts of a full blown > Windows OS and make it integral to the core for speed and to > get away from > it actually being a separate product. Then after that they > may look at how > to strip the host (or someone else - maybe you - will figure > it out for > them). > > > joe > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Roger Seielstad > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 7:54 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC's on VMWare > > The big thing that VMWare has going for it, and in my option > it's a big > thing, is the way they've built ESX server. > > The problem with using Virtual Server (or GSX Server from > VMWare) is that > you're still running a full blown OS underneath the virtual > machines. This > really causes a problem in which a single OS patch which > requires a reboot > means that all your VM servers also need to be rebooted - > even if they're > not Windows. > > ESX server uses a highly stripped down version of the Linux > kernel[1], and > few ancillary services. This architecture should result in > significantly > fewer issues in which the virtualization platform > necessitates downtime. I > lump the virtualization engine more in the hardware than > software side of > things - hardware should not require significant maintenance except in > break/fix scenarios. > > Now, maybe I need to see how hard it is to get Virutal Server > (or the PC > equivilent of it) running in WinPE. Maybe that's the fix to all these > problems. Of course, there are all those pesky licensing > issues to deal with > then..... > > Roger > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP > Sr. Systems Administrator > Inovis Inc. > > [1] My thoughts on Linux in general are relatively well > known[2] [2] I've > been quoted as saying "BSD Skunks the Penguin" on more than > one occasion > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 7:51 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC's on VMWare > > > > > > Well right off the bat... MS doesn't support Windows on > VMWARE; it is > > best effort unless Microsoft can determine that the issue can be > > reproduced on physical hardware. VMWARE claims this is because of > > competitive reasons but MS never supported it even before > they bought > > the Connectix product. > > > > >From what I have heard, our dev guys have actually hit > > things that they > > couldn't reproduce. > > > > Personally I would run Windows on VMWARE all day in a lab (we > > do) or at home > > (I did). I wouldn't even start to consider it for production (never > > ever ever). If you want to look at virtualization software > for running > > Windows, get into the Virtual Server preview program that MS has as > > obviously the Windows products will be fully supported on that > > software. > > > > IBM and HP both claim full support for Windows on VMWARE. > > However you have > > to keep in mind, what can they really do? If there is a > problem with > > VMWARE they can send that info back to the vendor. If they find a > > problem in Windows they can send that back to MS. They have > no power > > to really fix anything. I have had a conversation with one > of the guys > > at IBM concerning the support model and in the end he said, > there is > > no SLA for software support from anyone - no guarantees... > Great! He > > mentioned that all of their VMWARE contracts are one offs > negotiated > > specifically with the customer at hand. But again, in the end, all > > they can do is pat your hand and say, we understand, yes that does > > suck that it doesn't work, but don't worry we sent someone > a note - if > > we could fix it ourselves we would, but we can't. > > > > I actually stopped using the VMWARE products at home about 3 months > > ago and switched to the MS products as I figured I might as > well get > > used to it. > > > > > > Here are some links worth reading: > > > > > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;273508 > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=%2Fservicedesks > > %2Fbin%2Fkbsea > > rch.asp%3FArticle%3D320220 > > http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/hardware/server/st > > ory/0,10801,87 > > 185,00.html > > > > > > joe > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Mike Baudino > > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 3:12 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [ActiveDir] DC's on VMWare > > > > > > > > > > > > All, > > > > Server consolidation has us heading towards putting > production Windows > > Server 2003 domain controllers on VMWare VMs using ESX. We > > have not yet > > deployed AD widely (some business units have it and some > > don't) but are > > working on a new design that will handle all business units. > > Our lab is a > > combination of physical servers on workstation-class hardware > > and VMs on > > VMWare Workstation4 and on ESX. > > > > However, our direction for production DC's is VMs on ESX > > unless we find that > > it doesn't work properly or well enough. We're going to be > > testing this in > > the lab. I've seen recent emails about using VMs to spin off labs. > > But does anyone have experience running production DC's on > > VMs or any known > > "gotcha's" that they're willing to share? > > > > > > Thanks, > > Mike Baudino > > > > > > > > ******************* PLEASE NOTE ******************* This > > E-Mail/telefax > > message and any documents accompanying this transmission may contain > > privileged and/or confidential information and is intended > > solely for the > > addressee(s) named above. If you are not the intended > > addressee/recipient, > > you are hereby notified that any use of, disclosure, copying, > > distribution, > > or reliance on the contents of this E-Mail/telefax > > information is strictly > > prohibited and may result in legal action against you. Please > > reply to the > > sender advising of the error in transmission and immediately > > delete/destroy > > the message and any accompanying documents. Thank you. > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > > > > List info : > > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > > > List info : > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ -------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE------- PRIVILEGED / CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any attachments. This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to attorney-client privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you should kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this message. Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal law. Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's International, Inc. e-mail system. List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
