This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[mat-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Further Virtualisation Testing for RIPE Atlas Anchor
- Previous message (by thread): [mat-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Further Virtualisation Testing for RIPE Atlas Anchor
- Next message (by thread): [mat-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Further Virtualisation Testing for RIPE Atlas Anchor
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Romeo Zwart
romeo.zwart at ripe.net
Sun Sep 15 19:58:29 CEST 2013
Hi Randy, On 13/09/13 20:10 , Randy Bush wrote: > hi mirjam and atlas crew, > > as you know, i am interested in this type of calibration work for wider > application than atlas anchors. so please excuse my poking at it. Thanks for your questions and good to see that you have an interest. I'll try to clear up the confusion. Previously (last year), work was done with three virtualisation technologies, OpenVZ, VMware, KVM. A summary report on that work was published earlier this year [1], with details described here [2]. Based on that first phase we concluded that OpenVZ was the most promising of the investigated alternatives. We followed up with some more work, this time only looking at OpenVZ. The last summary article on Labs (announced by Mirjam this Friday) is referring to the follow up work done with OpenVZ, so no VMware or KVM there. With regard to your other questions: > precious little information about > o network configs (natted/bridged/...) All tests were done with a bridged setup. VMware tests in the first phase of the project used the VMware VMXnet3 driver, KVM tests used virtio. OpenVZ tests were done with 'plain' linux virtual interfaces. This was described in the phase I report mentioned above (see [2], p. 29). > o other loads on network, processors, ... In the last series of tests (OpenVZ only), the test systems were only loaded with ping tests as described. However, the switch that connected the test systems was also connecting other systems. In the earlier test, many combinations of cpu/disk/io/network loads were tested. See [2] for an extensive description and discussion of that. > o what hvisors were tested in the tables, and no differentiation > between them? The last report was only about OpenVZ, so indeed no differentiation. The earlier work investigated OpenVZ, VMware and KVM - lots of differentiation there. :) Details, again, in [2]. > i am also confused between testing of openvz, kvm (on which kernel(s)?), vmware, ... Please see my note above. Hope this answers your questions. Let me know if you have more. Best regards, Romeo [1]https://labs.ripe.net/Members/romeo_zwart/ripe-atlas-anchor-to-ripe-ncc-service-node [2] https://labs.ripe.net/Members/romeo_zwart/LuigiCorselloAtlasanchorvirtualisationfinalreport.pdf
- Previous message (by thread): [mat-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Further Virtualisation Testing for RIPE Atlas Anchor
- Next message (by thread): [mat-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Further Virtualisation Testing for RIPE Atlas Anchor
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ mat-wg Archives ]