Take a look at OSDVT. On 13 Sep 2012, at 17:36, "John A. Sullivan III" <jsullivan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 20:16 +0430, Mohsen Saeedi wrote: >> >> >> >> John A. Sullivan III <jsullivan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Thu, 13 >> Sep 2012 08:38:11 -0400: >>> On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 08:06 -0400, Alon Levy wrote: >>>>> Hi Mohsen, >>>>> >>>>> multiple sessions to the single VM are not on the roadmap. There is >>>>> experimental multi-client support but it is to make more users see >>>>> the >>>>> same session. >>>> Moshen, >>>> >>>> I misunderstood. In this case, I guess I don't actually see how we could fix your problem without circumventing any mechanism that windows has to count license users. >>>> >>>> Please ignore my lengthy email, it won't help you at all. >>>> >>>> Alon >> You can use some recipe for get ridding windows XP RDP limitation: >> http://www.petri.co.il/multiple-remote-desktop-sessions-on-windows-xp-sp3.htm >> > I think the problems are more legal than technical. From the above > link: > "However, be warned. Before you begin, I need to warn you that patching > the file and allowing more than one concurrent Remote Desktop session > will violate a few lines in the Windows XP EULA. Proceed with caution > and at your own risk." >>> <snip> >>> We are actually quite interested in something like this. In effect, it >>> is RDS but replaces the RDP protocol with SPICE for the advantages SPICE >>> brings. >>> >>> We have also been toying with the idea of using KVM/KSM to move to a >>> single server per user. This would provide much greater isolation and >>> non-repudiation but we are concerned about the overhead of KVM on the >>> KVM host and deduplication on the SAN. Thanks - John >> I think so, spice has experimental feature for multiple client to >> single windows XP now. is it true?? >> and what is the details for idea of using KVM/KSM to move to a single >> server per user? I didn't understand it very well. >> Thanks > This is something we are able to do splendidly well with VServer and > X2Go (an NX implementation). With the VServer hashification feature, I > can have 400 VMs on a host and only take one VM's worth of space for > system files. Moreover, all instances in memory only take the space of > one instance. Thus, we get deduplication and KSM almost for free. > Because the additional overhead is so minuscule (minimal memory and disk > and almost no virtualization overhead since it is a container technology > instead of a hypervisor), and because there are no licensing issues for > our Linux desktops, it makes sense to give each user a dedicated VM. > Not only does that give us excellent isolation from errant processes but > it also means (because of the details of our implementation) that each > user has a consistent IP address allowing us to correlate network events > with specific users. > > In some Windows licensing models, there is no cost differential between > individual workstations and individual VMs. In that model, we are > investigating the same scenario, viz., a single VM per user. However, > since we cannot use VServer for Windows guests, we either need to look > at Virtuozzo or produce the same results with KVM/KSM/dedupe. We > suspect that is much more resource intensive than it is with VServer. > > Whatever model we choose, we then need a transport protocol and, as > SPICE is refined especially in its handling of WAN video, we are quite > interested in using it rather than RDP for transport. I hope that > clarifies it. Thanks - John > > _______________________________________________ > Spice-devel mailing list > Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel