Re: virtualisation on SBS
- From: "kj" <kj@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 12:13:52 -0700
....and some recent non windows guest OS as well.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/virtualserver/evaluation/linuxguestsupport/default.mspx
------
Qualified Linux Guest Operating Systems
The following Linux operating systems have been tested and are on the list
of supported guests for Virtual Server 2005 R2:
? Enterprise distributions:
? Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1 (update 6)
? Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0 (update 6)
? Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4.0
? SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 9.0
? Standard distributions:
? Red Hat Linux 7.3
? Red Hat Linux 9.0
? SuSE Linux 9.2
? SuSE Linux 9.3
? SuSE Linux 10.0
--
/kj
"Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]" <sbradcpa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in message news:%23W3u5lwvGHA.4512@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
According to this Premium is supported as a virtual...
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/virtualserver/evaluation/virtualizationfaq.mspx
Which operating systems can be run as guests in Virtual Server 2005 R2?
A. The following operating systems are supported guests of Virtual Server:
? Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition (Windows Server 2003 SP1 support
for Virtual Server 2005 R2 only)
? Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition or later
? Windows Server 2003 Web Edition or later
? Windows Small Business Server 2003 Standard Edition or later
? Windows Small Business Server 2003 Premium Edition or later
? Windows 2000 Server
? Windows 2000 Advanced Server
? Windows NT Server 4.0 with Service Pack 6a
? Windows XP SP2 (for Virtual Server 2005 R2 only)
Eugene Tan wrote:
hi Jim,
I appreciate your prev replies.
I've just come across a Micrsoft doc and interestingly, it says that
SBS2003PE is supported as a host OS as well as a guest OS.
Sorry forgot to note the URL, but I believe they are from the links
on VSR2 - probably one of the whitepapers.
Was surprised to see that PE was also included, had expected to
see only SBS SE as a guest OS!
I suppose ISA docs are more explicit in what's not supported.
Cheers,
Eugene Tan
==================
"Jim Harrison (MSFT)" <jmharr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eYMrzQqqGHA.4992@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
It's about testing and validation by the product team, which could be
performed for the current versions.
It's not supported for any production deployment.
If you want to use VM for testing, demo or self-education, go for it.
The minute you install it on a VM guest for production, you step outside
of the support model.
--
--
Jim Harrison [ISA SE]
Read the help, books and articles!
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"Eugene Tan" <TechHelp-at.insights.com.sg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:%23H6gdphqGHA.3380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yes, I realise that if ISA is in a VM, it can't protect the host. But
would
it be able to protect the SBS apps etc in the VM - this way I could
use something simpler on the host OS.
Or do you mean it is a license or discouraged implementation because
of some issues? Pls do share.
A main benefit of ISA is being able to simply configuration and tie-in
to the AD. I think I still get this benefit within a VM. If so (big
if),
what might I need to do at the host OS and router/DSL end?
I know, I need to also read the ISA book!
Thanks for comments.
Eugene Tan
==============
"Jim Harrison (MSFT)" <jmharr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:OeCFvGeqGHA.3248@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ISA is not supported on any Virtual Machine guest OS for any production
deployment.
--
--
Jim Harrison [ISA SE]
Read the help, books and articles!
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
"Eugene Tan" <TechHelp-at.insights.com.sg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:%23foz7CZqGHA.2440@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
hi,
I'm wondering how effective virtualisation would be with SBS.
I would also be concerned about security and firewalls.
Scenario:
SBS2003 Premium (maybe R2). 15 users, could increase to 20.
SQLserver may also be deployed for accounting application,
load is expected to be quite low, mainly billing-related queries
ad-hoc.
There're some 5 or 6 users who need remote access who have
notebooks so when they're outside RWW to their desktop is not
an option so I plan to use TS on Win2k3. For other occasional
remote users, the plan is for RWW.
I've seen posts saying that SBS doesn't use much CPU resources,
mainly need 1 GB to be quite happy. I suppose SQL2000/2005
would increase that somewhat (let's say, add another 1 GB).
Originally, I planned to use dual Opteron single-cores for the SBS
and Opteron 1xx or Athlon64 dual-core for the terminal server,
since the load is so light for the TS. Anything wrong with this idea?
Instead of the above, could I use VPC or VS or VMware?
Then instead of TS server hardware, I could increase the specs for
the server to dual-CPU dual-core Opteron/Xeon with 4 GB mem.
There are a couple of virtual configs:
1. SBS native on the hardware, and run TS inside the VPC (or
virtual alternatives); I suppose in this config ISA would help to
protect the whole setup,
2. Windows (TS) native on hardware (then I can go with x64) and
SBS in virutal PC,
3. Windows x64 native, then Windows TS in one VPC and SBS
in another VPC,
4. Wonder which virtual s/w is more efficient?
Would such setup work for low-load TS of not more than 10 users?
Any thoughts, which of the above config is better? Or is the whole
idea silly?
TIA,
Eugene Tan
.
- References:
- Re: virtualisation on SBS
- From: Eugene Tan
- Re: virtualisation on SBS
- From: Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]
- Re: virtualisation on SBS
- Prev by Date: Re: PC Anywhere
- Next by Date: Re: PC Anywhere
- Previous by thread: Re: virtualisation on SBS
- Next by thread: Upgrading from windows server 2000 standard to 2003 server standard
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
