On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Alexandru Juncu <[email protected]> wrote:
> There seems to be a lot of talk about the revision for LPIC-2, I just > wanted to bring to discussion a topic: virtuali[zs]ation (us/uk). > Today, it's very hard _not_ to be confronted with virtualization > technologies, especially in the Linux world. KVM. LXC/OpenVZ, Xen are > things everyone is talking about. > The problem with virtualization, and maybe it's because I'm an American so I notice it more, but people seem to get obsessed with "brand name" and "marketing" ... instead of focusing on open standards. That's why a lot of people incorrectly accuse others of bias or other non-sense, when some people are trying to point out there is a single standard library, command line interface, etc... for _all_. ;) I.e., libvirt, virsh, etc... These were created by Red Hat to make things hypervisor and technology _agnostic_. One standard for all. If you teach it, you hit at least half of daily operations. Yes, if some people want to say some one is biased towards Red Hat, focusing on libvirt is a valid point ... but a better, more valid point of how _unbiased_ someone is actually trying to be. ;) Virtually everyone, including proprietary vendors, announced support for libvirt very early on. Some of the proprietary vendors paid more lip service, but even some of the latest, in-house libvirt developments support them. And the libvirt project even supports containers. I.e., if you missed it, Red Hat is already big-time into lxc, leveraging SELinux for increased security. It's already in Fedora, and the models/roles of lxc that will be supported in RHEL7 was announced as Summit. [1] Then there's oVirt, which is based on libvirt, and not only Hypervisor agnostic, but supports many other management solutions. E.g., it's ... - (OSS HyperVisor) ~ ESXi - oVirt ~ vSphere and _not_ ... - (OSS HyperVisor) ~ vSphere. I know, I know, doesn't fit the "my Hypervisor beat up your honor student" argument that people want to have here. And I know several in the Xen camp seeded the "they are (other Hypervisor)" argument, for their own reasons (especially for those of us who know the principals involved). But if you look at libvirt, virsh, etc..., it's the one, single standard for all. Being a heavy user of virtualization solutions both for personal use > and in student classes (LPIC classes too), I have always been > surprised that these topics never made it at lest as mentions in > LPIC-1. > Again ... if you want coverage, people need to drop the "my Hypervisor beat up your honor student" arguments ... and focus on libvirt, virsh, etc... That's one way to get "basic" coverage. But I think this is an important topic for a modern Linux System > Administrator and I think it should be a topic in LPIC-2. I know that > LPIC-3 has topics about this (the LPIC-304 being the specialization > for this). I know that LPIC-2 already has a lot of topics pushed into it and that > it's already crowded. But I just wanted to raise the issue for debate > to see if there are others that think that including it in LPIC-2 > would be a benefit for students and future Linux system > administrators. > Did I mention libvirt and virsh? Sorry, continually broken record. ;) -- bjs [1] Red Hat Summit 2013 - "Linux Containers Overview & Roadmap" - http://rhsummit.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/sarathy_w_0340_secure_linux_containers_roadmap.pdf -- Bryan J Smith - Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org - http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
