Comments for Securlogic Blog http://blog.securlogic.com Tech bites with an Asian touch. Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:33:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 Comment on VMware ESX 3i, VMware Server 2.0, Citrix XenServer or Sun xVM VirtualBox? by Ranxerox http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28&cpage=1#comment-107 Ranxerox Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:50:46 +0000 http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28#comment-107 I can only chime in on my experience with VMware server 2.0 and VirtualBox but I'm getting ready to test VMW 2.0, ESXi, and VirtualBox for a multi-site server virtualization scheme proposal to the company I'm consulting for. I have set up virtual hosts before with VM Server 1.02/2.0 (Quad - dual core opterons, 32Gb RAM, 9Tb iSCSI SAN), but my comparative experiences with both are on a Dual core AMD64 4800+, 4Gb DDR2, 750Gb SATA2, ASUS A8N-SLI MB. VMware Server (and ESXi) have the advantages of good industry recognition, hardware built with it in mind, and it's so "popular" its name is almost layman recognizable making it easier to "sell". VMware detracting factors are the web only console (slow and twitchy), that the freeware demo is speed crippled vs. ESX(i), that ESXi is not console manageable, and the Windows only administration client is HUGE (although i haven't tried it yet as I can't see shelling out the cash for the rather slim "approved hardware" list to build a server from). The speed crippling of the freeware versions is the biggest detractor as it makes production emulation testing cost prohibitive, or very slow. VirtualBox (which I have been using for approx. 3 months) has a small disk and resources impact, is snappy quick (compared to VMware), and can import a variety of VM disk types (vmware migration caveat that the disk image must be a monolithic .vmdk and not chopped into 2Gb chunks. If it is in 2Gb .vmdk chunks you must convert them into 1 file via VMware 1st before importing into VB).Once imported the guest OS' run fine. VB's detractor situations are not quite enterprise level in features (yet), no remote virtual machine management app (although VNC is acceptable), and it seems to grab host memory and not give back all of it (this needs more thorough testing). I'll have more definite data and experiences by mid-summer, but right now I'm leaning towards VB with a custom kernel on the host. The versatility of a type II vs. a type I host is very appealing. I can only chime in on my experience with VMware server 2.0 and VirtualBox but I’m getting ready to test VMW 2.0, ESXi, and VirtualBox for a multi-site server virtualization scheme proposal to the company I’m consulting for.
I have set up virtual hosts before with VM Server 1.02/2.0 (Quad - dual core opterons, 32Gb RAM, 9Tb iSCSI SAN), but my comparative experiences with both are on a Dual core AMD64 4800+, 4Gb DDR2, 750Gb SATA2, ASUS A8N-SLI MB.
VMware Server (and ESXi) have the advantages of good industry recognition, hardware built with it in mind, and it’s so “popular” its name is almost layman recognizable making it easier to “sell”.
VMware detracting factors are the web only console (slow and twitchy), that the freeware demo is speed crippled vs. ESX(i), that ESXi is not console manageable, and the Windows only administration client is HUGE (although i haven’t tried it yet as I can’t see shelling out the cash for the rather slim “approved hardware” list to build a server from). The speed crippling of the freeware versions is the biggest detractor as it makes production emulation testing cost prohibitive, or very slow.
VirtualBox (which I have been using for approx. 3 months) has a small disk and resources impact, is snappy quick (compared to VMware), and can import a variety of VM disk types (vmware migration caveat that the disk image must be a monolithic .vmdk and not chopped into 2Gb chunks. If it is in 2Gb .vmdk chunks you must convert them into 1 file via VMware 1st before importing into VB).Once imported the guest OS’ run fine.
VB’s detractor situations are not quite enterprise level in features (yet), no remote virtual machine management app (although VNC is acceptable), and it seems to grab host memory and not give back all of it (this needs more thorough testing).
I’ll have more definite data and experiences by mid-summer, but right now I’m leaning towards VB with a custom kernel on the host.
The versatility of a type II vs. a type I host is very appealing.

]]> Comment on VMware ESX 3i, VMware Server 2.0, Citrix XenServer or Sun xVM VirtualBox? by David http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28&cpage=1#comment-106 David Sat, 16 Jan 2010 17:08:20 +0000 http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28#comment-106 We use VMWare server just about everywhere because it works really well on commodity hardware. We use inexpensive refurb optiplex machines with a beefy NAS over NFS. The biggest reason we like VMWare server is because we have control over the base operating system which is 90% Ubuntu server and 10% CentOS 5. We use scripts to shutdown the VMs, copy the vm files to the NAS and start the VMs backup. On a stand-alone machine without a NAS, the same scripts copy the vm files to esata or usb hard drives. A lot of our scripting is centralized from a linux script host that uses rsa certificates to ssh to the vmware hosts. That way we can centralize our backup schedules and log files are copied to a single repository where we use Splunk to monitor for failure conditions. None of that is possible in the other offerings. However, XenServer 5.5.0 is a VERY VERY close second as it has a documented and supported base operating system loosely based on CentOS 5 that we are currently testing our scripts on. Thanks for the post. I found it very informative. We use VMWare server just about everywhere because it works really well on commodity hardware. We use inexpensive refurb optiplex machines with a beefy NAS over NFS. The biggest reason we like VMWare server is because we have control over the base operating system which is 90% Ubuntu server and 10% CentOS 5. We use scripts to shutdown the VMs, copy the vm files to the NAS and start the VMs backup. On a stand-alone machine without a NAS, the same scripts copy the vm files to esata or usb hard drives. A lot of our scripting is centralized from a linux script host that uses rsa certificates to ssh to the vmware hosts. That way we can centralize our backup schedules and log files are copied to a single repository where we use Splunk to monitor for failure conditions.

None of that is possible in the other offerings. However, XenServer 5.5.0 is a VERY VERY close second as it has a documented and supported base operating system loosely based on CentOS 5 that we are currently testing our scripts on.

Thanks for the post. I found it very informative.

]]> Comment on VMware ESX 3i, VMware Server 2.0, Citrix XenServer or Sun xVM VirtualBox? by Phillip Chee http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28&cpage=1#comment-67 Phillip Chee Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:15:30 +0000 http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28#comment-67 With respect to Sun's VirtualBox I think you're comparing apples to oranges when put up against Xenserver and VMware ESXi. Xenserver and ESXi are bare-metal Type I hypervisors while VirtualBox is a Type II hosted hypervisor. VMware Server is also a Type II hypervisor but features the remote web-based management of a Type I hypervisor. VirtualBox should be compared to VMware Workstation and Microsoft VirtualPC or Parallels Workstation to make any comparison meaningful and fair. With respect to Sun’s VirtualBox I think you’re comparing apples to oranges when put up against Xenserver and VMware ESXi. Xenserver and ESXi are bare-metal Type I hypervisors while VirtualBox is a Type II hosted hypervisor. VMware Server is also a Type II hypervisor but features the remote web-based management of a Type I hypervisor. VirtualBox should be compared to VMware Workstation and Microsoft VirtualPC or Parallels Workstation to make any comparison meaningful and fair.

]]> Comment on Public or Private? IPv6 must lead the way. by pradeep http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=59&cpage=1#comment-58 pradeep Wed, 01 Jul 2009 11:39:43 +0000 http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=59#comment-58 Its already implemented.. check this soft http://www.lanoninternet.com which uses windows teredo with ipv6 address to connect two m/c over internet. no more port forwarding... Its already implemented.. check this soft http://www.lanoninternet.com
which uses windows teredo with ipv6 address to connect two m/c over internet. no more port forwarding…

]]> Comment on Public or Private? IPv6 must lead the way. by Hanz http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=59&cpage=1#comment-57 Hanz Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:34:50 +0000 http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=59#comment-57 the last i heard, the japanese are going to migrate everything to IPv6 by latest 1st quarter of next year but what about S'pore ? Other than FTTH, does we have plans for migrating to IPv6 yet ?? the last i heard, the japanese are going to migrate everything to IPv6 by latest 1st quarter of next year but what about S’pore ? Other than FTTH, does we have plans for migrating to IPv6 yet ??

]]> Comment on VMware ESX 3i, VMware Server 2.0, Citrix XenServer or Sun xVM VirtualBox? by justin.lee http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28&cpage=1#comment-4 justin.lee Mon, 23 Mar 2009 03:34:41 +0000 http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28#comment-4 It's not the console management tool I'm referring to. It's the ability to fully manage the VM (add disk, change RAM settings, allocate CPU resources, migrate to another host, backup, etc.) from a single tool. VirtualBox lacks this ability. It’s not the console management tool I’m referring to. It’s the ability to fully manage the VM (add disk, change RAM settings, allocate CPU resources, migrate to another host, backup, etc.) from a single tool. VirtualBox lacks this ability.

]]> Comment on VMware ESX 3i, VMware Server 2.0, Citrix XenServer or Sun xVM VirtualBox? by Hanz http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28&cpage=1#comment-2 Hanz Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:13:38 +0000 http://blog.securlogic.com/?p=28#comment-2 hi, in regards to this below, " xVM VirtualBox does not have the remote management capabilities of VMware ESX 3i or VMware Server 2.0. It works more like a client app and requires that your server runs a GUI (X11), somewhat like VMware Player. " Ever heard of VBoxHeadless ?? it isa tool that comes with Virtual Box that allows you to connect to the virtual machines over a remote desktop connection, so there's no need for the VirtualBox GUI. Link : http://www.howtoforge.com/vboxheadless-running-virtual-machines-with-virtualbox-2.0-on-a-headless-ubuntu-8.04-server Best Regards hi,

in regards to this below,

” xVM VirtualBox does not have the remote management capabilities of VMware ESX 3i or VMware Server 2.0. It works more like a client app and requires that your server runs a GUI (X11), somewhat like VMware Player. ”

Ever heard of VBoxHeadless ?? it isa tool that comes with Virtual Box that allows you to connect to the virtual machines over a remote desktop connection, so there’s no need for the VirtualBox GUI.

Link : http://www.howtoforge.com/vboxheadless-running-virtual-machines-with-virtualbox-2.0-on-a-headless-ubuntu-8.04-server

Best Regards

]]>