The supported status of Windows on VMWARE, in
a nutshell, is this
Premier Customer
You have best effort support and if they can't
figure it out, you have to duplicate the issue on hardware.
Non-Premier Customer
You have to duplicate the issue on
hardware.
I, myself, would have no issue running Windows on ESX, I
have seen some amazing things on it. As for GSX, I would probably run VS instead
so there is no doubt about the supportability.
That being said, I know of companies (like HP for instance)
that have offical support for Windows on VMWARE and have a very good track
record of working out the issues. In fact, last time I asked, they hadn't hit a
problem they weren't able to get corrected prior to going to the point of
duplicating on physical hardware and getting MS involoved. However, if worse
comes to worse, they will move the image to a physical and do that interface
with MS. That is just my outside look into what I heard about that group
doing that though so if you went that direction, obviously sit down and discuss
it at length with the salesman and techs involved with that
stuff.
Personally, until MS has a ESX version they need to be
supporting Windows on ESX (they have a GSX look alike so I can understand them
not being forced into supporting it). They have so many people doing it against
their wishes anyway that they are starting to look a bit silly for it. It is a
bad precedence, in my mind, to say something isn't supported that most people
are willing to just go do anyway. It puts people that much closer to doing other
things MS doesn't support because hey, doing this other thing that they said
wasn't supported worked so well we made it the whole corporate direction. I
visualize people running all sorts of software that hack into LSASS and
intercept LDAP calls and anything else. There are no levels of what is and isn't
supported by MS. It is supported or not depending on how big of a check you send
MS every year. That is black and white. Again if you get used to doing things MS
says are unsupported, you will probably be quicker to do it more and more. MS
Support suffers in that case in my opinion.
joe
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Seely Jonathan J
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 7:11 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Virtual Domain Controllers
Thanks, Al.
Given all the rants, er, discussions, about single
purpose servers (thanks, Joe), I'd like to not do that. The sites (~18 of
them) range in size from 20 to 200 users. Consistency is good, so
whatever solution we come up with I plan to do the same thing in each remote
office.
This change to VM is more about hardware reduction in
outlying offices rather than specific cost savings measures (though of course,
those are always appreciated up the chain). If there are reasons to not go
with VMs on DCs (e.g. if memory usage in the VM environment can cause AD
corruption), I need to know that. Hearing that the configuration is not
'officially' supported is not a show stopper if many people are successfully
doing it and feel it should be supported by MS.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 3:36 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Virtual Domain Controllers
Could
you just do the file/print on the DC? In a small environment you could
probably get away with it.
Al Maurer
Service Manager, Naming and Authentication
Services
IT | Information
Technology
Agilent
Technologies
(719) 590-2639;
Telnet 590-2639
http://activedirectory.it.agilent.com
----------------------------------------------
A good plan today is better than a perfect plan
tomorrow.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Seely Jonathan J
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 12:54 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] Virtual Domain Controllers
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Seely Jonathan J
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 12:54 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] Virtual Domain Controllers
Hi All,
I have a question about running DCs on GSX server. I understand that MS does not support this configuration, but I've heard that many people are running DCs in this fashion. Can anyone give some advice in this arena? The idea here is to do VM for a file/print, and another one for a DC in our remote sites. Currently, we've got different hardware for each box, but we're trying to consolidate a bit out there.
Thank you.
JJ Seely
Systems
Administrator
Oregon Department of
Justice
Division of Child Support
(503) 378-4500 x22277
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*****CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE*****
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
************************************
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
************************************
*****CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE*****
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
************************************
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
************************************
