On 31/05/2017 15:29, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > I would just ignore it. To some extent, the modern usage of the type-1 > and type-2 terms is really more about VMware and Xen trying to bash KVM, > than anything else. > > > Could you point me to where Xen is bashing KVM about the type? I am > mighty curious where it has any mention of one type being better than > the other. Citrix definitely tried: https://www.citrix.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/CitrixXenClient_SolutionBrief.pdf?version=1 "In the case of a Type-2 hypervisor, if the base OS is compromised, any of the virtual machines running on top of it are subject to compromise. A Type-1 solution provides a secure locked down hypervisor which owns all of the hardware, providing a fundamentally trusted platform to build multiple virtual machines with varying levels of privilege and trust. Additionally, with a Type-1 solution the virtual machines are totally isolated from each other so performance or security issues within one environment will not affect the other desktop environments on the system. In short, Type-1 provides greater control of security, a finer degree of arbitration over system resources, and higher levels of performance I didn't want to accuse the open source project---sorry about that. Paolo
