The VMguy

Second on the release list is an update to the standalone Converter (the better one IMO).  You can download the updated release here.  Some nice new features listed in the what’s new section of the release notes:

The VMware vCenter Converter Standalone 4.3 includes the following new functionality:

• Support for VMware vSphere 4.1 as source and destination targets
• Support for importing powered-off Microsoft Hyper-V R1 and Hyper-V R2 virtual machines
• Public API and sample code for submitting and monitoring Converter jobs
• Support for importing Windows 7 and Windows 2008 R2 sources
• Ability to throttle the data transfer from source to destination based on network bandwidth or CPU
• IPv6 support

Discontinued Support

• Support of the following operating systems is discontinued:
  • Windows 2000
  • Windows NT
• Support for OVF format is discontinued
• Support for VCB image sources is discontinued
• Linux installation support is discontinued

You may remember from a recent article that I wrote about the VMware licensing dilemmas, that one of the scenarios I mentioned was SRM licensing when a customer wants to protect only a small percentage of VMs.  In the per-CPU licensing model, a customer would have to license all of the CPUs in a cluster even if they wanted to protect only 10% of the VMs.  VMware has announced that Per-VM licensing will be available on September 1, 2010.  Customers will now be able to license SRM on a Per-VM basis.  Customers who like their per-CPU model will be able to continue that purchasing method until December 15, 2010.  After that, it’s per-VM only.

There are a few things to think about with regard to licensing  first, vSphere 4.1 now allows for DRS affinity so that VMs only move between certain hosts of a cluster.  I’m still waiting for a definite answer from my VMware friends but that should allow you to protect some VM’s and set their DRS Affinity to only the hosts that you own SRM CPUs for and still keep the full cluster for the unprotected VMs. Previously, VMware would recommend that you create a separate cluster for your “protected” VMs if they were a small subset of the whole.  Now with DRS Affinity, you can dictate that certain “protected” VMs only move between a subset of a cluster.  We’ll still have to wait and see the final ruling from VMware but I’m thinking that would work in the short-term for those in the per-CPU dilemma.

The second feature of the new licensing that I really like is the rolling average of VMs over the last twelve months.  What that translates to is that now I need to buy what my daily average of VMs protected would be over a 12 month period.  If I have certain points of the year where my VM count spikes, this average would be monitored by vCenter and alarm if I am going over my licensing limits.  However, I would only need the average number of protected VMs over the past year.  The system will continue to run after going over your limit but that’s definitely not something I would condone (Famous VMware SE saying: ethics don’t ship in the box people).

The per-vm licenses are sold in blocks of 25 and range from $1,250 to $11,250 depending on the product.  Per-vm licensing will be available for Chargeback, Appspeed, SRM, and, later this year, CapacityIQ.  You can find more information on VMware’s website here.

The last question I had was, “How do I know what my rolling average is for those licenses?”  The good news is that once you enter in a license key, the new license reporting manager in vSphere 4.1 will tell you what your rolling average is year-to-date.  Looks like someone was planning ahead.

The way I see it, there are two dilemmas that VMware has in the way their licensing is designed today.  One of them works against VMware and one works against VMware customers (or at least makes it harder for them).  The former is definitely the bigger of the two so lets discuss that one first.  This topic comes up frequently when new versions of ESX are coming out.  We’ve already heard that an update is coming this year so I figured that since today is the half-way point in the year, this was a good time to bring up the topic again.

You probably noticed by now that there is a limitation in Standard and Enterprise editions of vSphere to a maximum of 6-cores per CPU.  The Advanced and Enterprise-Plus editions of vSphere have a licensed limit of 12-cores per CPU.  Now that Intel’s 8-core CPUs and AMD’s 12-cores are out, what’s next?  Intel and AMD are sure to develop a proc with more than 12 cores (and probably sooner than we all think).  What will happen to VMware’s licensing then?  You have to remember that from a revenue standpoint, when a 24 core proc comes out, customers will be able to run twice as many workloads on that proc (or at least 50% more).  Moore’s Law states that processing performance of CPUs will double every two years.  With the processors doubling in power so quickly, customers are typically not doubling their number of VMs in the same time period.  The result is that customers tend to have a diminishing need to increase their ESX per-CPU licensing.  I know that there are exceptions to this rule, but in the SMB space the majority are not growing that fast (at least not in this economy).  The increase in processor performance actually works against VMware’s current licensing model. It not good to have a direct connection between your main revenue stream and someone else’s CPU release schedule.  What will happen?  What’s the right answer?  Your guess is as good as mine.  Will they go to a per-vm model?  Increase their current limits?  Find some middle-ground between the two?  Will they “grandfather” their customers like AT&T did with the iPad data plans?  Only VMware knows.  My opinion is that this is an issue that has to be dealt with eventually.  Maybe this will be the year, maybe next.

The second licensing dilemma that I run into is in Site Recovery Manager.  It’s no secret that SRM is my favorite non-ESX product from VMware.  As you probably know, SRM is licensed by the physical CPU where the protected virtual machines reside or could reside.  Here’s where that model breaks down:  let’s say I have a smaller customer who’s policy is only to have a DR plan for 5 of their most critical Virtual Machines.  Those five VMs run in a cluster comprise of 5 dual CPU hosts with HA and DRS enabled.  According to the SRM licensing model, I need 10 CPUs of SRM for those 5 VMs.  That does not fly well.  The solution I’ve heard some engineers mention is to create a separate smaller cluster for just the protected VMs.  I’m not fond of that idea because it goes against the consolidation principal.  I’ve never felt that lowering your consolidation ratio was justified because it did not fit a licensing model.

I know there are people much smarter than me at work trying to find a solution to both of these scenarios.  I’m hopeful that they will get resolved in a way that’s fair to both sides.  Maybe this is the year, maybe it is not.  Either way, we’ve made it thru half of 2010, perhaps the answers lie in the last 6 months of the year.

In the past, I have reviewed all of the technical papers on the VMware site.  I’ve decided to change direction a little and I only plan on reviewing papers that would apply to the everyday VM Admin.  I’m also going to throw in my own ranking on each article (*****, 1 to 5 stars).  You will also notice a “vKeeper” reference in some of the papers.  This award is for the papers that I keep a local copy of on my computer for reference when I need them.  They are the docs that all admins should read thru and use as a reference as needed.  I have also added a section to my admin bookmark page just for the vKeeper docs.

PCoIP Display Protocol: Information and Scenario-Based Network Sizing Guide – (12 pages) A good paper with very good insight on the PCoIP protocol used in VMware View.  It gives some good suggestions and the required bandwidths needed to satisfy the end users on their desktop experience.  A must have for view deployments.  (****, 4 of 5 stars)

Application Presentation to VMware View Desktops with Citrix XenApp – (3 pages) This is a whitepaper to show how to deploy applications in VMware View desktops from XenApp.  While I can see this being useful for View admins who use XenApp, the description and instructions are very minimal.  Probably something better suited for a KB article. (**, 2 of 5 stars)

Timekeeping in VMware Virtual Machines – (26 pages) This is a very important topic for all VM Admins to know.  Time is relevant to everything in a VM, whether you are trying to authenticate to Active Directory or troubleshooting using event logs, accurate time is very important.  This paper goes into some really great detail on how VMware maintains accurate time in VMs.  If you are a VMware admin, this should be a standard read.   (*****, 5 of 5 stars, vKeeper)

SAN System Design and Deployment Guide – (244 pages of storage goodness)  I have a storage background so I specifically enjoy this one.  If you are running ESX on SAN shared storage (you should be on some type of shared storage) then this is a must read.  This whitepaper is also very helpful if you are studying for the VCP or one of the new VCAP exams.  This is another paper I keep local and definitely one all VM admins with SAN should review.  (*****, 5 of 5 stars, vKeeper)

Best Practices for Running vSphere on NFS Storage – (14 pages) On the heels of the SAN design and deployment guide, this paper describes the best practices for running NFS on vSphere.  I like the fact that this article references outdated best practices that have changed and why they have changed.  This is a HUGE help to admins who google a topic only to find conflicting information.  My only regret on this paper is that I would like to see more detail on the advanced options and how they affect the performance of NFS.  Still a important doc for VM Admins using NFS storage.  Should be reviewed by all of them to make sure they are current in their deployment of NFS best practices.  (****, 4 of 5 stars)

Location Awareness in VMware View 4 – (8 pages) Good information for View Admins to know where to find out where their clients are connecting from.  This is a common request from hospitals to have printers “follow the user” as they float from terminal to terminal.  There are some advanced topics in this article and some Active Directory knowledge is definitely required especially when using loopback mode in group policy processing.  Good info and hopefully View will include some GUI-based  native features in the future to assist with this.  (***, 3 of 5 stars)

VMware vSphere 4.0 Security Hardening Guide – (70 pages) This is a outstanding reference for any VM Admin.  Security affects everyone’s environment, from the 3-man shop to the largest infrastructure.  Setting the precedence of a solid, secure enviornment from the ground up will provide you with a infrastructure that is solid as a rock. I recommend reviewing this paper often and keeping this one handy   (*****, 5 of 5 stars, vKeeper)

VMware vStorage Virtual Machine File System – Technical Overview and Best Practices – (13 pages) This is a entry level paper on some of the very basics of VMFS and how they relate to RDMs.  This should be a good introduction to VMFS to new VM Admins.  I hoped with “Best Practices” in the title that there would be more technical references (advanced options for VMFS and how tweaking them affects the storage performance for instance).  I was also disappointed to see the LUN size question answered vaguely, suggesting to refer to the storage vendor to size your LUNs appropriately.  I prefer Duncan’s approach to LUN sizing and it’s what I recommend to all of my customers.  (***, 3 of 5 stars)

Look for the vPaper Report again next quarter (hopefully with some new releases in between). Until then, happy reading!

This week I had the luxury of attending the three-day vSphere: Design Workshop in Orlando, FL.  The class is now a requirement for VMware Enterprise Partners which was the reason for my attendance.  The class had about 15 attendees comprised of partners, customers and VMware employees.  There are no formal prerequisites for the course although I would highly recommend a VCP4 as some of the topics and recommendations get very technical and that level of experience would be very helpful.  This class is intended for those that will be designing virtual datacenters.  It is directly related to the newly-announced VCAP4-DCD certification and I would also recommend it for any one considering the VCDX certification.

The class was comprised of eight modules.  Day one ran through modules one thru four, day two had modules 5 and 6 and day three was comprised of modules seven and eight.  You can read this to see the syllabus for the class as well as the description for each of the modules.

There were a two things about this class that I found to be very different than any other VMware class I had attended.  First, there was no real administrative work.  We never used the vSphere client or looked at a host.  We barely used the classroom terminals at all.  Almost all of the work was whiteboarding and drawing architectures of networks and storage and physical infrastructure.  For the labs, the class was divided into two groups, one group was given an enterprise customer case study and the other received a SMB case study.  Both study’s had physical environments that wanted to virtualize.  The enterprise study was obviously significantly larger however the SMB had a very limited budget.  Both had items to challenge the designers.  As we reached the end of each module, we would incorporate what we learned into that phase of the design.  The labs were actually designed very well.  At the end of each lab session, each group had to pick someone to defend their design to the rest of the class (surely to prep us for what we might find at the VCDX defense session).

The second thing I noticed about the class that was very different from other classes was the references to blogger’s information.  The instructor referenced Duncan, Frank and Mike on more than one occasion (The VMguy was left out unfortunately – guess I’ll have to try harder).  Never had I seen such a display of non-vmware owned information in such a class.  Personally, I read all of their information pretty religiously yet I still found things I did not know or had not read.  This class was a very good summary of the pitfalls to avoid in design.  It was a collaboration of all of the gotchas that these designers (some who are now VCDXs) have seen.  Everything from the configuration maximums to what features are not supported with Fault Tolerance.  It was an outstanding display of all the things you have to remember when designing an entire virtualized datacenter.

My only complaint would be that the case study notes for the labs were incomplete.  We constantly found ourselves wanting to ask our imaginary customer for more information.  This can be expected somewhat as the class is a new offering from the education department.  I must say that our instructor was constantly requesting feedback for the course and promised to relay that information back to the class designers.

All in all, I would highly recommend this class to anyone who might need to design a virtualized datacenter.  It was an outstanding collaboration of experiences and best practices that would be required before creating a accurate, reliable, properly sized, well thought-out design.  Well done VMware Education Department, well done.