Virtualization future.

[seth bollinger]

Hello All,

I've read some interesting things about virtualization on your website,
and was wondering what you had planned for the future regarding Intel's
vanderpool/silvervale and AMD's Pacifica?

It would be really cool to see an open-source competitor to VMWare's ESX
server.

I would love to be able to have a VM that I could dynamically move
around from home to multiple machines at work, that was set up exactly
the way I need it to be.  Especially if it used an intelligent,
cache-on-use shared network file system.

Instead of having to have a machine set up properly at work that I could
ssh to, I could simply initiate a connection to the VM machine, load my
VM and do some work knowing that the VM has all the tools I need to
accomplish work remotely.

I apologize if I'm rehashing old ideas, or haven't found a thread where
this was previously discussed (or missed reading some documentation).

Thanks,

Seth

[Bernhard Pöss]

seth bollinger wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> It would be really cool to see an open-source competitor to VMWare's ESX
> server.
What about Xen ?

> Instead of having to have a machine set up properly at work that I could
> ssh to, I could simply initiate a connection to the VM machine, load my
> VM and do some work knowing that the VM has all the tools I need to
> accomplish work remotely.
Wouldn't VPN be a better solution for that problem?

Bernhard

[seth bollinger]

As I understand Xen, it must run on linux.  VMWare ESX server is a
microkernel that's very close to the hardware.  It does not require
windows or linux to run on top of.

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/readmes/user/user.html
http://www.vmware.com/products/esx/

A vpn is what I use now, but it requires that I have each machine I work
on be pre-set up and loaded with the proper tools to accomplish tasks.  
This is time consuming.  Plus it's not flexible.  Also, if I have only
one VM to keep updated, it much easier for patching tools and services.

Seth

Bernhard Pöss wrote:

>seth bollinger wrote:
>  
>
>>Hello All,
>>
>>It would be really cool to see an open-source competitor to VMWare's ESX
>>server.
>>    
>>
>What about Xen ?
>
>  
>
>>Instead of having to have a machine set up properly at work that I could
>>ssh to, I could simply initiate a connection to the VM machine, load my
>>VM and do some work knowing that the VM has all the tools I need to
>>accomplish work remotely.
>>    
>>
>Wouldn't VPN be a better solution for that problem?
>
>Bernhard
>
>
>  
>

[David Leimbach-2]

On Mar 9, 2006, at 6:56 AM, seth bollinger wrote:

> As I understand Xen, it must run on linux.  VMWare ESX server is a  
> microkernel that's very close to the hardware.  It does not require  
> windows or linux to run on top of.
>
Xen runs on NetBSD, Linux and can run on FreeBSD with patches that I  
think will be in FreeBSD 6.1.

> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/readmes/user/user.html
> http://www.vmware.com/products/esx/
>
> A vpn is what I use now, but it requires that I have each machine I  
> work on be pre-set up and loaded with the proper tools to  
> accomplish tasks.  This is time consuming.  Plus it's not  
> flexible.  Also, if I have only one VM to keep updated, it much  
> easier for patching tools and services.
>
> Seth
>
> Bernhard Pöss wrote:
>
>> seth bollinger wrote:
>>
>>> Hello All,
>>>
>>> It would be really cool to see an open-source competitor to  
>>> VMWare's ESX
>>> server.
>>>
>> What about Xen ?
>>
>>
>>> Instead of having to have a machine set up properly at work that  
>>> I could
>>> ssh to, I could simply initiate a connection to the VM machine,  
>>> load my
>>> VM and do some work knowing that the VM has all the tools I need to
>>> accomplish work remotely.
>>>
>> Wouldn't VPN be a better solution for that problem?
>>
>> Bernhard
>>
>>
>>
>

[Christopher Nelson]

>
> > As I understand Xen, it must run on linux.  VMWare ESX server is a
> > microkernel that's very close to the hardware.  It does not require
> > windows or linux to run on top of.
> >
> Xen runs on NetBSD, Linux and can run on FreeBSD with patches
> that I think will be in FreeBSD 6.1.


Actually, it's the other way around.  NetBSD, Linux, and FreeBSD run on
XEN. Xen is a hypervisor, and it runs BELOW the OS.  Otherwise the OS's
wouldn't be able to be virtualised, would they?  Even on VMX-enabled
procs, the OS's have to run on top of Xen, not vice-versa.

You may be thinking about the dom0 OS, that provides the services for
other OS's.  

-={C}=-

[David Leimbach-2]

On Mar 9, 2006, at 7:30 AM, Christopher Nelson wrote:

>>
>>> As I understand Xen, it must run on linux.  VMWare ESX server is a
>>> microkernel that's very close to the hardware.  It does not require
>>> windows or linux to run on top of.
>>>
>> Xen runs on NetBSD, Linux and can run on FreeBSD with patches
>> that I think will be in FreeBSD 6.1.
>
>
> Actually, it's the other way around.  NetBSD, Linux, and FreeBSD  
> run on
> XEN. Xen is a hypervisor, and it runs BELOW the OS.  Otherwise the  
> OS's
> wouldn't be able to be virtualised, would they?  Even on VMX-enabled
> procs, the OS's have to run on top of Xen, not vice-versa.
>
> You may be thinking about the dom0 OS, that provides the services for
> other OS's.
>

Pedant alert! [just kidding, it's worth clarifying :)]

I am, in fact, talking about the fact that Xen "lives inside" (and  
outside) the kernels of NetBSD, Linux and FreeBSD, and that these 3  
run in ring 0 on Intel CPUs.

Any of those three can be used to manage guest OSes running in Ring1.

Of course with VMX extensions I think even ring0 is able to be  
context switched via some assembly routines, which is why it's  
possible to run things like Windows that haven't been ported (in a  
released form) to use the Xen hypercalls as several guest OSes  have.

Dave

> -={C}=-

[Christopher Nelson]

> On Mar 9, 2006, at 7:30 AM, Christopher Nelson wrote:
>
> >>
> >>> As I understand Xen, it must run on linux.  VMWare ESX
> server is a
> >>> microkernel that's very close to the hardware.  It does
> not require
> >>> windows or linux to run on top of.
> >>>
> >> Xen runs on NetBSD, Linux and can run on FreeBSD with
> patches that I
> >> think will be in FreeBSD 6.1.
> >
> >
> > Actually, it's the other way around.  NetBSD, Linux, and
> FreeBSD run
> > on XEN. Xen is a hypervisor, and it runs BELOW the OS.  
> Otherwise the
> > OS's wouldn't be able to be virtualised, would they?  Even on
> > VMX-enabled procs, the OS's have to run on top of Xen, not
> vice-versa.
> >
> > You may be thinking about the dom0 OS, that provides the
> services for
> > other OS's.
> >
>
> Pedant alert! [just kidding, it's worth clarifying :)]
>
> I am, in fact, talking about the fact that Xen "lives inside" (and
> outside) the kernels of NetBSD, Linux and FreeBSD, and that
> these 3 run in ring 0 on Intel CPUs. Any of those three can
> be used to manage guest OSes running in Ring1.

Xen is no more inside the dom0 OS than Linux or Windows is inside your
application, whatever that may be.  They are layers.  Xen provides
services, the next layer up utilizes those services.  Even the
"idealized driver" provision is more like IPC than anything else.  Guest
OS's call Xen services, much like an application calls OS services.

According to Xen docs, no guest OS runs at the same privilege level as
the hypervisor, and thus not even the dom0 guest OS runs in ring 0.  

>
> Of course with VMX extensions I think even ring0 is able to
> be context switched via some assembly routines, which is why
> it's possible to run things like Windows that haven't been
> ported (in a released form) to use the Xen hypercalls as
> several guest OSes  have.

With VMX turned on, the processor now has a ring -1.  Xen executes in
ring -1, and full virtualization (vs. Xen's normal paravirtualization)
is possible.  The processor accurately traps all privileged
instructions, which it does not do otherwise.

-={C}=-

[Jan Stoess]

Hi Seth,

>
> I've read some interesting things about virtualization on your
website,
> and was wondering what you had planned for the future regarding
Intel's
> vanderpool/silvervale and AMD's Pacifica?

we are currently investigating support for VT/Pacifica on Pistachio. I
can't tell you any timeframe, though; just that support is definitely
being planned.

Best Regards,
-Jan