On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Alan Hodgson <ahodgson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On November 26, 2010 11:25:06 am Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>> KVM, itself, was unusable in my testing due to the "bridged network"
>>> mishandling and its complete lack of a concept of failover for network
>>> issues, particularly pair bonding for the server itself. PXE for the
>>> clients was unusable, and it ran like a dyslexic on too many opiates,
>>> slow, twitchy, and unpredicatable.
>>
>> The UI in RHEL 5/CentOS 5 is definitely very limited, but KVM does work with
>> all these things under the hood. In particular KVM seems to run fine on top of
>> a simple host bridge, which can in turn rely on a bonded interface. I have had
>> no problems with boot support, although I confess I don't use PXE - DHCP and
>> kickstart over the LAN work fine, though.
>
> It is not merely "limited".
>
> PXE is very common for server installations of brand new hardware, or
> for remote KVM managed hardware, to avoid having to pop a CD in it.
> It's well undertood, and I got nowhere, even with it for KVM. (VMWare
> and Xen worked fine.)
interesting. I have a working home lab with KVM and I bootstrap all my
vm's from pxe, both win and lin. So I know it works fine. Not managed
from the virtual machine manager, though. Next year I will be evaluating
it, and it has better support pxe :)
--
natxo
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
