[atlas] VM probes (was Re: Feature request for IP record route feature in RIPE Atlas)

> On 10 Nov 2015, at 12:20, Wilfried Woeber <woeber at cc.univie.ac.at> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2015-11-10 11:18, Stephan Wolf wrote:
> 
>> ANCHOR as an VM would really make sense.
>> What do you think about this ?
> 
> I think this would really be a BAD idea! The anchors are meant to be more
> capable and more stable than the candy probes. Messing around with that
> concept should not be done, imho.
> 
>> Just my 2 cents .-)
> 
> ...same here :-)
> 
> Wilfried
> 
> PS: I myself do see the beauty of the idea to virtualize the (candy-)probes,
>    but I have - already a while ago - been convinced that the data generated
>    by them should *not* be mixed in with the data from those under full NCC
>    control. And whether those VM probes should even be catalogued by the NCC
>    is another open question.

After having lived and still work in a Solaris physical metal land, I took onboard the virtual machine world for a webservice/emailservice.
The virtual world is cheaper in long run.
However does require a vm/ov image.

I think it is important cloud as such as machines are monitored and I thought vm probe would for great for that

Colin