I received this item today from InfoWorld. I'm wondering if anyone on the
IBM VM development team could comment if any part of z/VM is being
integrated into this software. (Alan, Romney?)
Mark Post
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
PARTNERWORLD - IBM AND VMWARE WORK ON PA
A couple of days ago, IBM gave two presentations to some of the staff here.
The first presentation was on Linux and they mentioned VM on Intel. There
was nothing mentioned on the differences between it and VM on a zSeries.
The second presentation was on VM. I asked the VM presenter about the
dif
Mark:
Conceptually, there are bound to be similarities. From a code base point
of view, there is no feasible means of integration, if only because z/VM
is Assembler and PL/X. Of course, the architectural differences present a
much more significant barrier to having any commonality in the code bas
ark K"
cc:
Sent by: Linux Subject: VM for Intel?
on 390 Port
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ARIST.EDU>
02/19/02 03:16
PM
On Tuesday, 02/19/2002 at 10:16 EST, "Post, Mark K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I received this item today from InfoWorld. I'm wondering if anyone on
the
> IBM VM development team could comment if any part of z/VM is being
> integrated into this software. (Alan, Romney?)
> [snip]
- - - - - - -
ndation for the converse.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: David Goodenough [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 3:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: VM for Intel?
But VMware and z/VM are entirely separate. They both do much the same
thing, in fact one c
al Message-
>From: David Goodenough [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 3:59 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: VM for Intel?
>
>
>But VMware and z/VM are entirely separate. They both do much the same
>thing, in fact one could almost say that z/VM
This makes me again suggest that we have a
forum for discussing an open specification for hypervisor interaction.
There was at one time a FreeVM-L discussion list. The purpose was
not to produce any code (at least, not specifically any hypervisor
code) but rather form a specification for comm
>But that was my question. Since IBM and VMWare are partnering on this
>effort, would IBM have contributed any sort of functionality lifted from
>z/VM? If not, why the partnership? Romney has stated that there are going
>to be certain conceptual similarities, and I realized that from the
>begin
> But that was my question. Since IBM and VMWare are partnering on
> this effort, would IBM have contributed any sort of functionality
> lifted from z/VM? If not, why the partnership? ...
Mark: Just as IBM supports Linux across all four of our server lines,
we also wanted to support "partitioning
> This makes me again suggest that we have a
> forum for discussing an open specification for hypervisor interaction.
> There was at one time a FreeVM-L discussion list. The purpose was
> not to produce any code (at least, not specifically any hypervisor
> code) but rather form a specificatio
/2002 07:57 AM ---
Jim Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 02/19/2002
08:50:15 PM
Please respond to Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by:Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: VM for
> I apologize for not following the whole thread here, but in case it has not
> been mentioned, the following should be pointed out to further
> differentiate z from x as far as virtualization goes: The zSeries
> architecture and hardware design contains facilities not found in the Inel
> machi
Consulting ITS, Advanced Technical Support, IBM Japan
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM Notes: Mikio
Sakaki/Japan/IBM@IBMJP
Tel:81-43-297-6432 IBM Mail : MK-KT0
"Post, Mark K"
cc:
> > We need a Lingua Franca for hypervisors.
> > Consider the command
> >
> > hcp attach F200-F202 mylinux
> >
> > Makes perfect sense, though the "handle" is a zSeries I/O range.
> > What would that mean to INTeL? Might look more like
>
> Did I miss something? That address rang
-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Paul Kaufman
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:10 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: VM for Intel
A couple of days ago, IBM gave two presentations to some of the staff
here.
The first presentation was on Linux and they mentioned V
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 10:12:32AM -0600, cmead wrote:
> Actually z/VM (at least in the 2.3 release) IS available on Intel.
> The "trick" is that the Intel box must be running the Flex/ES code
which
> provides emulation of a 390 box on an Intel platform. Then any IBM
> operating system including
> > > We need a Lingua Franca for hypervisors.
> > > Consider the command
> > >
> > > hcp attach F200-F202 mylinux
> > >
> > > Makes perfect sense, though the "handle" is a zSeries I/O range.
> > > What would that mean to INTeL? Might look more like
> >
> > Did I miss something?
> It sure would be nice, if in their presentations, IBM pointed out
> the benefits of zSeries. Why don't they?
Paul:
A very good point. We have come to assume that our mainframe customers
are familiar with our partitioning capability, so that we don't talk
about it much. Don't forget that neithe
> I guess VMware has no relationship with IBM VM.
Other than a nod to the S/390 VM as a ancestor. Some of the early papers on
VMWare mentioned the S/390 VM as a motivating force for creating VMWare.
-- db
>
I spoke to some of the VMware folks very early in the development of their product --
in fact before
they ever released the product for public consumption. At that time (2-3 years ago
now) I mentioned to
these guys that the VM concept was not new and in fact had been available on mainframe
sys
>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 5:01 AM
Subject: Re: VM for Intel?
> [...] The shocked look on their young faces combined with a further
half-hour discussion on the
> subject served as ample evidence that these members of the VMware team
were certainly not inspir
22 matches
Mail list logo
