[132123] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: OT: VM slicing and dicing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brandon Kim)
Tue Nov 16 08:04:24 2010
From: Brandon Kim <brandon.kim@brandontek.com>
To: <mysidia@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:04:17 -0500
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimPUJapjtN12pFNBfag17SSY73b77Ly0VWmyScY@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Thanks for the suggestions James! One of the issues I had=2C (which is why =
I turned to NANOG) was that I wasn't entirely
sure what keywords to search for!! So thank you for that. All of the criter=
ia's you brought up are valid and I will add them
to the list of things to consider.
It's awfully difficult to figure out who can do what as it's just not possi=
ble to test all the different vendors out there unless
you have a large R&D team and a lot of time.
I think we are on the same page as far as what "We" think I need. But just =
to clarify.
1) We'd like to be able to have a web portal where new or existing clients =
could request servers of all types: windows=2C linux etc...
Configure what it is that they need and in some amount of time=2C the VM's =
are provisioned. They receive some kind of email confirming
that their new provisioned server is available.
2) Backend - Since we haven't invested much time into the backend=2C we're =
open to all possibilities. It doesn't need to be VMware at all.
Xen seems to be extremely popular.
3) Licensing - Of course this will be all unique to each vendor but the mor=
e complicated the licensing=2C the more it's a turn off and difficult to
keep track of. Not to "plug". But so far OnApp's pricing is very straightfo=
rward.
4) Multi-Tenant - Absolutely needs to support this.
I don't expect anyone here to do research for me=2C but I assume that being=
a network operator=2C many of us would have some input and clearly
I've received great feedback. I've been in touch with numerous vendors that=
were given to me from this thread and I can't wait to demo/try their produ=
cts....
One question I do have for any that actually read through this entire email=
(haha) is about the physical network switch. Is there a case for the switc=
h=2C especially
in today's high density environment to go with 1GIG switches as the minimum=
? It seems pretty obvious but I'm wondering if it's really a necessity?
Can anyone on this list argue that 10/100 will be suffice?
Thanks again!
Brandon
> Date: Mon=2C 15 Nov 2010 21:13:51 -0600
> Subject: Re: OT: VM slicing and dicing
> From: mysidia@gmail.com
> To: brandon.kim@brandontek.com
> CC: nanog@nanog.org
>=20
> On Tue=2C Nov 9=2C 2010 at 10:17 AM=2C Brandon Kim <brandon.kim@brandonte=
k.com> wrote:
> > I'm not looking for companies that offer this service=2C but the actual=
software engines that allow you
> > to create VM's on the fly. So a customer goes to your website and says =
I want Win2008 with 8gigs of RAM and 120gigs of HDD.
> > Just like custom configuring a new PC.
>=20
> How about I send you some terms to search for=2C using your favorite
> search engine...
> Multi-Tenant Hosting > Cloud Computing > IaaS / HaaS
> (Infrastructure as a Service) > Self-Service Provisioning
> Because the question is so vague=2C I think you need more research.
> If you read the documentation of portal software=2C you should be able
> to tell to what extent it would be "turn key"
>=20
> Before looking too closely at any offering... some things to think about =
are..
> How would you go about handling virtual networks and access to them?
> Will you want one shared network (with requisite Layer 2 security minefi=
eld)=2C
> or will your portal of choice somehow decide to permission and make
> certain LANs available to certain users' VMs?
>=20
> There will be security and performance considerations that some portal
> software programs allow you to answer=2C and some do not. So you
> need to decide the hard requirements for security=2C management
> flexibility=2C UI attractiveness/ease of use=2C functionality for the
> end user=2C resource management=2C and price :)
>=20
>=20
> Different portals have different options=2C so define requirements first.
> A Multi-Tenant IaaS environment (meaning different users sharing
> pieces of metal=2C storage=2C etc) brings in some complexity.
>=20
> Think about how will the resources be balanced? E.g. Will you have a por=
tal
> place workloads on its own=2C or rely on some outside system like vmware =
DRS.
> Will the portal implement and enforce resource SLAs for Network latenc=
y/loss=2C
> limit the number of VMs per NIC or per datastore=2C Memory=2C CPU
> and provide I/O response delay assurances=2C or will machines be left
> underutilized
> / overutilized=2C because the portal is bad at optimizing placement on ph=
ysical
> servers=2C or bad at avoiding overcommit?
>=20
>=20
> For an IaaS provider=2C underutilization eventually means you are eating
> more kW=B7h than necessary=2C and overutilization could be
> immediately detrimental.
>=20
> The different major virtualization software vendors each have their own
> Self-Service Provisioning solutions=2C and there are some third party pro=
grams.
> Most are for Enterprise internal self-provisioning=3B Hosting providers
> might have
> special requirements like "integrated user signups and billing"
> and "no license restriction against provisioning for outside users".
> I would expect these to be more expensive=2C or include monthly per-user=
fees.
>=20
>=20
> Offhand I recall Virtuozzo [perhaps the oldest?]=2C Enomaly /
> Enomalism=2C enStratus=2C MS Dynamic Datacenter Kits which are a
> framework=2C VMware vCloud Express through the VSPP=2C Citrix XCP=2C
> Eucalyptus=2C as interesting
> by no means exhaustive.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --
> -JH
=
