Just tried a Debian 9 running on XenServer 6.5 SP1 with model "Other 2.6x Linux 
(64-bit)":

# virt-what --version
1.15
# virt-what
hyperv
xen
xen-domU
#


Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2018, 13:50 +0200 schrieb Stephan Seitz:
> AFAIK not for 6.5 SP1.
> https://xen-orchestra.com/blog/meltdown-and-spectre-for-xenserver/ shows that 
> 7.x is fixed and gives the hint,
> that HVM guests are not affected (at least for spectre)
> 
> https://support.citrix.com/article/CTX231390
> " 6.2 SP1, and 6.5 SP1 versions of XenServer require extensive architectural 
> changes to do so. Citrix is therefore not making hotfixes for these versions 
> available to customers, and will continue to
> work with hardware vendors on other mitigation strategies. Customers on the 
> 6.2 SP1 and 6.5 SP1 versions are strongly recommended to upgrade to a more 
> recent version. "
> 
> I haven't tried it so far, but recent debian versions were kind of picky with 
> different kinds of Xen virtualization as I've seen on "regular" VMs.
> 
> 
> 
> Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2018, 11:42 +0000 schrieb Paul Angus:
> > 
> > virt-what will give 'xen-domU' for paravirtualized guests. Didn't XenServer 
> > make some kind of change around this as a Meltdown/Spectre migation? 
> > 
> > 
> > Kind regards,
> > 
> > Paul Angus
> > 
> > paul.an...@shapeblue.com 
> > www.shapeblue.com
> > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> > @shapeblue
> >   
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stephan Seitz <s.se...@heinlein-support.de> 
> > Sent: 11 April 2018 12:38
> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Egress rules not applied in 4.11.0
> > 
> > Hi martin,
> > 
> > I've just read your issue on github and was wondering how you;ve been able 
> > to select Debian 9.
> > But maybe you did a fresh installation.
> > 
> > We did an update from 4.9.2 to 4.11.0 and were able to select "Debian 
> > GNU/Linux 7(64-bit)" as highest possible Debian-version. The documentation 
> > said to register the new systemvm-template before
> > updating the management server.
> > 
> > Maybe your issue is hot-fixed by registering a template with Debian 7 
> > profile.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > - Stephan
> > 
> > 
> > Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2018, 13:30 +0200 schrieb Martin Emrich:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I investigated further, and opened an issue:
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/2561
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > 
> > > Martin
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Am 11.04.18 um 12:18 schrieb Martin Emrich:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks... But I think something else is now broken, too...:
> > > > 
> > > > The SystemVMs are now no longer being provisioned: They come up 
> > > > "empty" with "systemvm type=".
> > > > 
> > > > I also deleted the Console Proxy VM, and the new one is plain, too...
> > > > 
> > > > I tried with Git branch 4.11 (producing 4.11.1-SNAPSHOT RPMs), same 
> > > > effect...
> > > > 
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > 
> > > > Martin
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Am 11.04.18 um 00:56 schrieb Rohit Yadav:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Martin,
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is a known issue, a freshly restarted VR may not have the 
> > > > > EGREE related tables which is why any rules will fail to apply. As 
> > > > > a workaround, you can restart the network without selecting the 
> > > > > cleanup option which will reconfigure the VR and add the egress table.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I've a fix in this PR:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2508/files#diff-2d3ea57d
> > > > > fd9156e3983b1bb2d64abecd
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > - Rohit
> > > > > 
> > > > > <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: Martin Emrich <martin.emr...@empolis.com>
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 2:13:57 PM
> > > > > To: CloudStack-Users
> > > > > Subject: Egress rules not applied in 4.11.0
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi!
> > > > > 
> > > > > I upgraded my test cluster from 4.9 to 4.11. The default policy 
> > > > > for isolated networks is "Deny".
> > > > > 
> > > > > But now, adding rules to allow egress traffic are not applied to 
> > > > > the virtual router. adding a 0.0.0.0/0 rule looks fine from the 
> > > > > UI, but does not appear in the iptables output on the VR.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Any Ideas?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > 
> > > > > Martin
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> > > > > www.shapeblue.com
> > > > > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
> > > > > 
> > Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
> > 
> > Stephan Seitz
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > Heinlein Support GmbH
> > Schwedter Str. 8/9b, 10119 Berlin
> > 
> > http://www.heinlein-support.de
> > 
> > Tel: 030 / 405051-44
> > Fax: 030 / 405051-19
> > 
> > Zwangsangaben lt. §35a GmbHG: HRB 93818 B / Amtsgericht 
> > Berlin-Charlottenburg,
> > Geschäftsführer: Peer Heinlein -- Sitz: Berlin
> > 
> > 
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
> 
> Stephan Seitz
> 
> --
> 
> Heinlein Support GmbH
> Schwedter Str. 8/9b, 10119 Berlin
> 
> http://www.heinlein-support.de
> 
> Tel: 030 / 405051-44
> Fax: 030 / 405051-19
> 
> Zwangsangaben lt. §35a GmbHG: HRB 93818 B / Amtsgericht
> Berlin-Charlottenburg,
> Geschäftsführer: Peer Heinlein -- Sitz: Berlin
> 
> 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Stephan Seitz

--

Heinlein Support GmbH
Schwedter Str. 8/9b, 10119 Berlin

http://www.heinlein-support.de

Tel: 030 / 405051-44
Fax: 030 / 405051-19

Zwangsangaben lt. §35a GmbHG: HRB 93818 B / Amtsgericht
Berlin-Charlottenburg,
Geschäftsführer: Peer Heinlein -- Sitz: Berlin


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to