On 2008-09-30 at 20:37+01 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yup, KVM is cool, much easier to use, and with virtio-enabled guests
> it's about the same speed as Xen.
I really have to beg to differ about "easier to use", for two reasons:
1. Xen's network subsystem bypasses netfilter.
(One could argue there's a benefit to protecting public
bridged guests with netfilter, but I think from a philsophical
viewpoint, public bridged guests really should have unfettered
network access.)
2. Setting up a public bridge is a snap in Xen. In KVM, it is
massively complex (i.e., virt-manager can't do it), and
requires tools (tunctl) Fedora doesn't even provide:
http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/Networking
IMHO, KVM's big win is that it doesn't interfere with ACPI functions,
so features like CPU frequency throttling work even if you're running
a KVM guest.
But man oh man, is public bridge networking in KVM a nightmare...
--
STABILIZATION = CHAOS; END THE FED!
The Bailout Reader - <http://mises.org/story/3128>
The Rescue Package Will Delay Recovery - <http://mises.org/story/3131>
Taking Money Back - <http://mises.org/story/2882>
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
