You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@cloudstack.apache.org by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro> on 2013/01/10 01:34:21 UTC
best supported hypervisor
Hello,
No flame intended, what's the best supported hypervisor for use with
current Cloudstack?
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
RE: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com>.
Nux,
I would say XenServer is the best supported hypervisor with KVM rapidly catching up. This is mainly because I've known quite a few XS production deployments.
You'll find a lot of community members are on KVM and since it's been open to apache, there's been a lot of contribution in KVM in terms of bringing it up to date with the latest Ubuntu release etc and software features. I think if you're looking for the latest advances in technology, KVM is probably even earlier than XS.
I don't think you'll go wrong with either hypervisor.
As for SDN in your other thread, I will let Hugo speak to Nicira's readiness. There's also a desire to bring OVS to production level in the near future.
--Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nux! [mailto:nux@li.nux.ro]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 1:44 AM
> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor
>
> On 10.01.2013 03:50, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> > Nux,
> >
> > What your use case? Are you trying a pay for hypervisor, or
> > OpenSource? What are the top 5 features you are looking for?
> >
> > That makes a difference in the question.
> >
> > Matt
>
> Hello Mathias,
>
> I prefer open source, kvm+libvirt whenever possible; I have worked with
> xen/xenserver before though and I could give it a try once again if it
> checks all the boxes.
>
> At the end of the day I want a solution that is reliable; to be honest
> I almost went with Openstack in production, but there're some
> show-stoppers for me, like 1:1 NAT which simply does not work for
> everyone no matter how excited they get about it.
>
> So what I'm hoping from cloudstack is:
> - able to assign public IPs to VMs
> - not trap me in the 4094 vlan limit (hence the need for gre or smth
> else)
> - ipv6 (i understand this is coming in 4.1)
> - decent upgradability, so next `yum update` won't make the wheels fall
> off
>
> Of course, now that I've been reading/watching stuff about Cloudstack I
> discovered all sorts of nice stuff that I want, like multiple types of
> primary storage etc.
>
> Any pointers?
>
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
Re: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Jason Davis <sc...@gmail.com>.
Agreed... I'm sure folks are doing production workloads on KVM but for me
personally I'd much prefer VMWare or XS/XCP as both are "battle hardened".
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com> wrote:
> That's interesting. I was thinking about this on the way to work.
> There's really two aspects to the question.
>
> What I answered was really how well CloudStack supports a hypervisor. How
> production ready is the hypervisor itself is really something we need
> feedback on like this one from Kraig.
>
> I would imagine hypervisor production readiness ranking would be VmWare,
> XS, KVM.
>
> --Alex
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kraig Amador [mailto:kamador@shopzilla.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:49 AM
> > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor
> >
> > One more opinion on the topic,
> >
> > We have been using KVM for a few months now but we are noticing some
> > severe disk io performance issues that we have been unable to tune our
> way
> > out of. We have tested Xen and seen 5x improvements on the same
> > hardware. I've spoken to other people who have had the same problem
> > when using local disk on KVM, so its something you should look out for
> if disk
> > performance is a concern.
> >
> > It is so drastic for us that we are considering rebuilding all of our
> 50+ VM
> > hosts on Xen.
> >
> > --
> > Kraig Amador
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, January 10, 2013 at 5:22 AM, Alex Huang wrote:
> >
> > > Nux,
> > >
> > > I would say XenServer is the best supported hypervisor with KVM rapidly
> > catching up. This is mainly because I've known quite a few XS production
> > deployments.
> > >
> > > You'll find a lot of community members are on KVM and since it's been
> > open to apache, there's been a lot of contribution in KVM in terms of
> > bringing it up to date with the latest Ubuntu release etc and software
> > features. I think if you're looking for the latest advances in
> technology, KVM
> > is probably even earlier than XS.
> > >
> > > I don't think you'll go wrong with either hypervisor.
> > >
> > > As for SDN in your other thread, I will let Hugo speak to Nicira's
> readiness.
> > There's also a desire to bring OVS to production level in the near
> future.
> > >
> > > --Alex
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Nux! [mailto:nux@li.nux.ro]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 1:44 AM
> > > > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org (mailto:cloudstack-
> > users@incubator.apache.org)
> > > > Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor
> > > >
> > > > On 10.01.2013 03:50, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> > > > > Nux,
> > > > >
> > > > > What your use case? Are you trying a pay for hypervisor, or
> > > > > OpenSource? What are the top 5 features you are looking for?
> > > > >
> > > > > That makes a difference in the question.
> > > > >
> > > > > Matt
> > > >
> > > > Hello Mathias,
> > > >
> > > > I prefer open source, kvm+libvirt whenever possible; I have worked
> with
> > > > xen/xenserver before though and I could give it a try once again if
> it
> > > > checks all the boxes.
> > > >
> > > > At the end of the day I want a solution that is reliable; to be
> honest
> > > > I almost went with Openstack in production, but there're some
> > > > show-stoppers for me, like 1:1 NAT which simply does not work for
> > > > everyone no matter how excited they get about it.
> > > >
> > > > So what I'm hoping from cloudstack is:
> > > > - able to assign public IPs to VMs
> > > > - not trap me in the 4094 vlan limit (hence the need for gre or smth
> > > > else)
> > > > - ipv6 (i understand this is coming in 4.1)
> > > > - decent upgradability, so next `yum update` won't make the wheels
> fall
> > > > off
> > > >
> > > > Of course, now that I've been reading/watching stuff about
> Cloudstack I
> > > > discovered all sorts of nice stuff that I want, like multiple types
> of
> > > > primary storage etc.
> > > >
> > > > Any pointers?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> > > >
> > > > Nux!
> > > > www.nux.ro (http://www.nux.ro)
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
RE: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com>.
That's interesting. I was thinking about this on the way to work. There's really two aspects to the question.
What I answered was really how well CloudStack supports a hypervisor. How production ready is the hypervisor itself is really something we need feedback on like this one from Kraig.
I would imagine hypervisor production readiness ranking would be VmWare, XS, KVM.
--Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kraig Amador [mailto:kamador@shopzilla.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:49 AM
> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor
>
> One more opinion on the topic,
>
> We have been using KVM for a few months now but we are noticing some
> severe disk io performance issues that we have been unable to tune our way
> out of. We have tested Xen and seen 5x improvements on the same
> hardware. I've spoken to other people who have had the same problem
> when using local disk on KVM, so its something you should look out for if disk
> performance is a concern.
>
> It is so drastic for us that we are considering rebuilding all of our 50+ VM
> hosts on Xen.
>
> --
> Kraig Amador
>
>
> On Thursday, January 10, 2013 at 5:22 AM, Alex Huang wrote:
>
> > Nux,
> >
> > I would say XenServer is the best supported hypervisor with KVM rapidly
> catching up. This is mainly because I've known quite a few XS production
> deployments.
> >
> > You'll find a lot of community members are on KVM and since it's been
> open to apache, there's been a lot of contribution in KVM in terms of
> bringing it up to date with the latest Ubuntu release etc and software
> features. I think if you're looking for the latest advances in technology, KVM
> is probably even earlier than XS.
> >
> > I don't think you'll go wrong with either hypervisor.
> >
> > As for SDN in your other thread, I will let Hugo speak to Nicira's readiness.
> There's also a desire to bring OVS to production level in the near future.
> >
> > --Alex
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Nux! [mailto:nux@li.nux.ro]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 1:44 AM
> > > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org (mailto:cloudstack-
> users@incubator.apache.org)
> > > Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor
> > >
> > > On 10.01.2013 03:50, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> > > > Nux,
> > > >
> > > > What your use case? Are you trying a pay for hypervisor, or
> > > > OpenSource? What are the top 5 features you are looking for?
> > > >
> > > > That makes a difference in the question.
> > > >
> > > > Matt
> > >
> > > Hello Mathias,
> > >
> > > I prefer open source, kvm+libvirt whenever possible; I have worked with
> > > xen/xenserver before though and I could give it a try once again if it
> > > checks all the boxes.
> > >
> > > At the end of the day I want a solution that is reliable; to be honest
> > > I almost went with Openstack in production, but there're some
> > > show-stoppers for me, like 1:1 NAT which simply does not work for
> > > everyone no matter how excited they get about it.
> > >
> > > So what I'm hoping from cloudstack is:
> > > - able to assign public IPs to VMs
> > > - not trap me in the 4094 vlan limit (hence the need for gre or smth
> > > else)
> > > - ipv6 (i understand this is coming in 4.1)
> > > - decent upgradability, so next `yum update` won't make the wheels fall
> > > off
> > >
> > > Of course, now that I've been reading/watching stuff about Cloudstack I
> > > discovered all sorts of nice stuff that I want, like multiple types of
> > > primary storage etc.
> > >
> > > Any pointers?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> > >
> > > Nux!
> > > www.nux.ro (http://www.nux.ro)
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
On 10.01.2013 16:49, Kraig Amador wrote:
> One more opinion on the topic,
>
> We have been using KVM for a few months now but we are noticing some
> severe disk io performance issues that we have been unable to tune
> our
> way out of. We have tested Xen and seen 5x improvements on the same
> hardware. I've spoken to other people who have had the same problem
> when using local disk on KVM, so its something you should look out
> for
> if disk performance is a concern.
>
> It is so drastic for us that we are considering rebuilding all of our
> 50+ VM hosts on Xen.
Hi,
Can you detail what kind of OS, kvm version etc you are seeing this
issues with? Maybe it's not a general problem ..
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
RE: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Anthony Xu <Xu...@citrix.com>.
That's interesting!
I'm not expecting 5x improvement.
Is virtIO enabled in KVM guest?
From information I got, may be wrong,
Xen PV is a little bit faster than KVM virtIO
But KVM with vHost + virtIO should be comparable with( might be better) Xen PV in terms of IO performance, since with vHost virtIO backend is in kernel, while Xen PV backend is in application, a lot of application/kernel context switches are eliminated.
Anthony
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kraig Amador [mailto:kamador@shopzilla.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:49 AM
> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor
>
> One more opinion on the topic,
>
> We have been using KVM for a few months now but we are noticing some
> severe disk io performance issues that we have been unable to tune our
> way out of. We have tested Xen and seen 5x improvements on the same
> hardware. I've spoken to other people who have had the same problem
> when using local disk on KVM, so its something you should look out for
> if disk performance is a concern.
>
> It is so drastic for us that we are considering rebuilding all of our
> 50+ VM hosts on Xen.
>
> --
> Kraig Amador
>
>
> On Thursday, January 10, 2013 at 5:22 AM, Alex Huang wrote:
>
> > Nux,
> >
> > I would say XenServer is the best supported hypervisor with KVM
> rapidly catching up. This is mainly because I've known quite a few XS
> production deployments.
> >
> > You'll find a lot of community members are on KVM and since it's been
> open to apache, there's been a lot of contribution in KVM in terms of
> bringing it up to date with the latest Ubuntu release etc and software
> features. I think if you're looking for the latest advances in
> technology, KVM is probably even earlier than XS.
> >
> > I don't think you'll go wrong with either hypervisor.
> >
> > As for SDN in your other thread, I will let Hugo speak to Nicira's
> readiness. There's also a desire to bring OVS to production level in
> the near future.
> >
> > --Alex
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Nux! [mailto:nux@li.nux.ro]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 1:44 AM
> > > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org (mailto:cloudstack-
> users@incubator.apache.org)
> > > Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor
> > >
> > > On 10.01.2013 03:50, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> > > > Nux,
> > > >
> > > > What your use case? Are you trying a pay for hypervisor, or
> > > > OpenSource? What are the top 5 features you are looking for?
> > > >
> > > > That makes a difference in the question.
> > > >
> > > > Matt
> > >
> > > Hello Mathias,
> > >
> > > I prefer open source, kvm+libvirt whenever possible; I have worked
> with
> > > xen/xenserver before though and I could give it a try once again if
> it
> > > checks all the boxes.
> > >
> > > At the end of the day I want a solution that is reliable; to be
> honest
> > > I almost went with Openstack in production, but there're some
> > > show-stoppers for me, like 1:1 NAT which simply does not work for
> > > everyone no matter how excited they get about it.
> > >
> > > So what I'm hoping from cloudstack is:
> > > - able to assign public IPs to VMs
> > > - not trap me in the 4094 vlan limit (hence the need for gre or
> smth
> > > else)
> > > - ipv6 (i understand this is coming in 4.1)
> > > - decent upgradability, so next `yum update` won't make the wheels
> fall
> > > off
> > >
> > > Of course, now that I've been reading/watching stuff about
> Cloudstack I
> > > discovered all sorts of nice stuff that I want, like multiple types
> of
> > > primary storage etc.
> > >
> > > Any pointers?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> > >
> > > Nux!
> > > www.nux.ro (http://www.nux.ro)
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Nik Martin <ni...@nfinausa.com>.
Be aware, users also report low IOPS on Xenserver 6.x when doing 4k
writes on iSCSI.
Regards,
Nik
Nik Martin
+1.251.243.0043 x1003
Relentless Reliability
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013, Kraig Amador wrote:
> Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS with qemu-kvm 1.0+noroms-0ubuntu14.3. I believe this is now the current version of KVM for precise, we were originally having problems with the NIC dropping out after a few days of usage but that was resolved by upgrading to 1.0+noroms-0ubuntu14.3. You can find the details about that and why we upgraded on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/qemu-kvm/+bug/997978.
>
> --
> Kraig Amador
>
>
> On Thursday, January 10, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Nux! wrote:
>
>> On 10.01.2013 16:49, Kraig Amador wrote:
>>> One more opinion on the topic,
>>>
>>> We have been using KVM for a few months now but we are noticing some
>>> severe disk io performance issues that we have been unable to tune
>>> our
>>> way out of. We have tested Xen and seen 5x improvements on the same
>>> hardware. I've spoken to other people who have had the same problem
>>> when using local disk on KVM, so its something you should look out
>>> for
>>> if disk performance is a concern.
>>>
>>> It is so drastic for us that we are considering rebuilding all of our
>>> 50+ VM hosts on Xen.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can you detail what kind of OS, kvm version etc you are seeing this
>> issues with? Maybe it's not a general problem ..
>>
>> --
>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>
>> Nux!
>> www.nux.ro (http://www.nux.ro)
>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
On 10.01.2013 17:19, Kraig Amador wrote:
> Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS with qemu-kvm 1.0+noroms-0ubuntu14.3. I believe
> this is now the current version of KVM for precise, we were
> originally
> having problems with the NIC dropping out after a few days of usage
> but that was resolved by upgrading to 1.0+noroms-0ubuntu14.3. You can
> find the details about that and why we upgraded on
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/qemu-kvm/+bug/997978.
Right.. Before you move so many VMs to xen, can't you test on a
RHEL6/Centos6 hypervisor? I would imagine their kvm/libvirt
implementation is very good since they develop it, maybe you get lucky
(or less unlucky).
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
Re: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Kraig Amador <ka...@shopzilla.com>.
Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS with qemu-kvm 1.0+noroms-0ubuntu14.3. I believe this is now the current version of KVM for precise, we were originally having problems with the NIC dropping out after a few days of usage but that was resolved by upgrading to 1.0+noroms-0ubuntu14.3. You can find the details about that and why we upgraded on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/qemu-kvm/+bug/997978.
--
Kraig Amador
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Nux! wrote:
> On 10.01.2013 16:49, Kraig Amador wrote:
> > One more opinion on the topic,
> >
> > We have been using KVM for a few months now but we are noticing some
> > severe disk io performance issues that we have been unable to tune
> > our
> > way out of. We have tested Xen and seen 5x improvements on the same
> > hardware. I've spoken to other people who have had the same problem
> > when using local disk on KVM, so its something you should look out
> > for
> > if disk performance is a concern.
> >
> > It is so drastic for us that we are considering rebuilding all of our
> > 50+ VM hosts on Xen.
> >
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Can you detail what kind of OS, kvm version etc you are seeing this
> issues with? Maybe it's not a general problem ..
>
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro (http://www.nux.ro)
>
>
Re: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Kraig Amador <ka...@shopzilla.com>.
One more opinion on the topic,
We have been using KVM for a few months now but we are noticing some severe disk io performance issues that we have been unable to tune our way out of. We have tested Xen and seen 5x improvements on the same hardware. I've spoken to other people who have had the same problem when using local disk on KVM, so its something you should look out for if disk performance is a concern.
It is so drastic for us that we are considering rebuilding all of our 50+ VM hosts on Xen.
--
Kraig Amador
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 at 5:22 AM, Alex Huang wrote:
> Nux,
>
> I would say XenServer is the best supported hypervisor with KVM rapidly catching up. This is mainly because I've known quite a few XS production deployments.
>
> You'll find a lot of community members are on KVM and since it's been open to apache, there's been a lot of contribution in KVM in terms of bringing it up to date with the latest Ubuntu release etc and software features. I think if you're looking for the latest advances in technology, KVM is probably even earlier than XS.
>
> I don't think you'll go wrong with either hypervisor.
>
> As for SDN in your other thread, I will let Hugo speak to Nicira's readiness. There's also a desire to bring OVS to production level in the near future.
>
> --Alex
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Nux! [mailto:nux@li.nux.ro]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 1:44 AM
> > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org (mailto:cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org)
> > Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor
> >
> > On 10.01.2013 03:50, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> > > Nux,
> > >
> > > What your use case? Are you trying a pay for hypervisor, or
> > > OpenSource? What are the top 5 features you are looking for?
> > >
> > > That makes a difference in the question.
> > >
> > > Matt
> >
> > Hello Mathias,
> >
> > I prefer open source, kvm+libvirt whenever possible; I have worked with
> > xen/xenserver before though and I could give it a try once again if it
> > checks all the boxes.
> >
> > At the end of the day I want a solution that is reliable; to be honest
> > I almost went with Openstack in production, but there're some
> > show-stoppers for me, like 1:1 NAT which simply does not work for
> > everyone no matter how excited they get about it.
> >
> > So what I'm hoping from cloudstack is:
> > - able to assign public IPs to VMs
> > - not trap me in the 4094 vlan limit (hence the need for gre or smth
> > else)
> > - ipv6 (i understand this is coming in 4.1)
> > - decent upgradability, so next `yum update` won't make the wheels fall
> > off
> >
> > Of course, now that I've been reading/watching stuff about Cloudstack I
> > discovered all sorts of nice stuff that I want, like multiple types of
> > primary storage etc.
> >
> > Any pointers?
> >
> > --
> > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> > Nux!
> > www.nux.ro (http://www.nux.ro)
> >
>
>
>
Re: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
On 10.01.2013 03:50, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> Nux,
>
> What your use case? Are you trying a pay for hypervisor, or
> OpenSource? What are the top 5 features you are looking for?
>
> That makes a difference in the question.
>
> Matt
Hello Mathias,
I prefer open source, kvm+libvirt whenever possible; I have worked with
xen/xenserver before though and I could give it a try once again if it
checks all the boxes.
At the end of the day I want a solution that is reliable; to be honest
I almost went with Openstack in production, but there're some
show-stoppers for me, like 1:1 NAT which simply does not work for
everyone no matter how excited they get about it.
So what I'm hoping from cloudstack is:
- able to assign public IPs to VMs
- not trap me in the 4094 vlan limit (hence the need for gre or smth
else)
- ipv6 (i understand this is coming in 4.1)
- decent upgradability, so next `yum update` won't make the wheels fall
off
Of course, now that I've been reading/watching stuff about Cloudstack I
discovered all sorts of nice stuff that I want, like multiple types of
primary storage etc.
Any pointers?
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
Re: best supported hypervisor
Posted by Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com>.
Nux,
What your use case? Are you trying a pay for hypervisor, or OpenSource? What are the top 5 features you are looking for?
That makes a difference in the question.
Matt
On Jan 9, 2013, at 7:34 PM, "Nux!" <nu...@li.nux.ro> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> No flame intended, what's the best supported hypervisor for use with
> current Cloudstack?
>
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
RE: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
On 11.01.2013 07:38, Hugo Trippaers wrote:
> Heya,
>
> The Nicira solution is pretty well tested with the XenServer
> hypervisors. We are using it on our production platforms for some
> time
> now and I know of several other people using it as well.
>
> The 4.0.0 release contains most of the basic features to create
> networks using the Nicira SDN solution. The upcoming 4.1 release will
> have additional features (L3 routing) and ui components for
> configuration. I'm planning on having the support for KVM also in
> release 4.1, most of the work is already done, what remains is mainly
> testing.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
Thanks, Hugo, looking forward to 4.1 then.
Lucian
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
RE: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
On 11.01.2013 07:38, Hugo Trippaers wrote:
> Heya,
>
> The Nicira solution is pretty well tested with the XenServer
Do you know if it works with XCP, too?
Lucian
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
RE: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com>.
Heya,
The Nicira solution is pretty well tested with the XenServer hypervisors. We are using it on our production platforms for some time now and I know of several other people using it as well.
The 4.0.0 release contains most of the basic features to create networks using the Nicira SDN solution. The upcoming 4.1 release will have additional features (L3 routing) and ui components for configuration. I'm planning on having the support for KVM also in release 4.1, most of the work is already done, what remains is mainly testing.
Cheers,
Hugo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 2:18 AM
> To: CloudStack Users
> Cc: Hugo Trippaers
> Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor + SDN
>
> Hugo Trippaers is the expert on the NVP integration.
> Here's a video describing the work he's doing
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5Z2CUBLwLc
>
>
>
> On 1/10/13 1:45 AM, "Nux!" <nu...@li.nux.ro> wrote:
>
> >On 10.01.2013 04:08, Alex Huang wrote:
> >> That's incorrect. OVS GRE is implemented currently on XenServer and
> >> KVM but is at prototype/demo quality. Nicira is on KVM, I believe.
> >> Hugo would know more about that.
> >>
> >> It is not the same as VPC and it is not from client to VR only.
> >>
> >> --Alex
> >
> >Alex,
> >
> >Right, so not production quality. Is the Nicira solution more tested?
> >Any pointers, please?
> >
> >--
> >Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> >Nux!
> >www.nux.ro
Re: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Chiradeep Vittal <Ch...@citrix.com>.
Hugo Trippaers is the expert on the NVP integration.
Here's a video describing the work he's doing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5Z2CUBLwLc
On 1/10/13 1:45 AM, "Nux!" <nu...@li.nux.ro> wrote:
>On 10.01.2013 04:08, Alex Huang wrote:
>> That's incorrect. OVS GRE is implemented currently on XenServer and
>> KVM but is at prototype/demo quality. Nicira is on KVM, I believe.
>> Hugo would know more about that.
>>
>> It is not the same as VPC and it is not from client to VR only.
>>
>> --Alex
>
>Alex,
>
>Right, so not production quality. Is the Nicira solution more tested?
>Any pointers, please?
>
>--
>Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
>Nux!
>www.nux.ro
RE: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
On 10.01.2013 04:08, Alex Huang wrote:
> That's incorrect. OVS GRE is implemented currently on XenServer and
> KVM but is at prototype/demo quality. Nicira is on KVM, I believe.
> Hugo would know more about that.
>
> It is not the same as VPC and it is not from client to VR only.
>
> --Alex
Alex,
Right, so not production quality. Is the Nicira solution more tested?
Any pointers, please?
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
RE: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com>.
That's incorrect. OVS GRE is implemented currently on XenServer and KVM but is at prototype/demo quality. Nicira is on KVM, I believe. Hugo would know more about that.
It is not the same as VPC and it is not from client to VR only.
--Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mathias Mullins [mailto:mathias.mullins@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 7:51 PM
> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: best supported hypervisor + SDN
>
> I believe SDN is form the client to the Virtual Router or VPC so it should be
> hypervisor agnostic feature.
>
> One of the developers may correct me here if needed.
>
> Matt
>
> On Jan 9, 2013, at 10:36 PM, "Nux!" <nu...@li.nux.ro> wrote:
>
> > On 10.01.2013 00:34, Nux! wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> No flame intended, what's the best supported hypervisor for use with
> >> current Cloudstack?
> >
> > In addition, I see 4.0 already supports SDN (gre tunnels through ovs i
> > imagine); is this available for all hypervisors/platforms?
> >
> > --
> > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> > Nux!
> > www.nux.ro
Re: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com>.
I believe SDN is form the client to the Virtual Router or VPC so it should be hypervisor agnostic feature.
One of the developers may correct me here if needed.
Matt
On Jan 9, 2013, at 10:36 PM, "Nux!" <nu...@li.nux.ro> wrote:
> On 10.01.2013 00:34, Nux! wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> No flame intended, what's the best supported hypervisor for use with
>> current Cloudstack?
>
> In addition, I see 4.0 already supports SDN (gre tunnels through ovs i
> imagine); is this available for all hypervisors/platforms?
>
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
RE: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com>.
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Isn't the Borg Collective already cloud based?
--Alex
Re: best supported hypervisor + SDN
Posted by Nux! <nu...@li.nux.ro>.
On 10.01.2013 00:34, Nux! wrote:
> Hello,
>
> No flame intended, what's the best supported hypervisor for use with
> current Cloudstack?
In addition, I see 4.0 already supports SDN (gre tunnels through ovs i
imagine); is this available for all hypervisors/platforms?
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro