Talk:Virtuozzo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It looks like an ad, and a WHOIS command shows that 208.251.212.1 belongs to SWSOFT, INC. -Chaos_rider

Anyway, it seems pretty useful. Who knows about product better than its creator? Honeyman 00:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The page is accurate; although, it _does_ sound like a sales pitch with lines like "Proponents state thousands of machines". It could use a health dose of comparison links such as on the XEN page. I have made a couple of updates but there is lots more that could be added. L rissman 2:11PM, Mar. 2, 2006 (EST)

Speaking of "thousands of VEs" I personally tried in somewhere in 2003 or so. You can run about 900…1000 light VEs on a 4Gb box, each VE running a web server, mail server, ssh server, and a few system daemons (init, syslog, …) -- and they are not just idling, but serving a web pages. And it scales up almost in a linear fashion, so you can run about 1800…2000 VEs on a box with 8GB of RAM. So this is not just words, but a reality.
Speaking of comparisons, I heard that IBM people will do an open third-party comparison of different virtualization solutions and will post the results to a web site. I will try to keep you updated on that. --K001 19:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I put in some additional content and tried to address the concerns here. This page did sound a little commercial I guess, especially in comparison to Xen, but check out the VMware page, it has the company logo in it.

Contents

[edit] VE firewall?

Recently User:Mfdragosh wrote:

Local firewall for a VPS can be deployed only in conjunction with a firewall service on the host machine.

I do not really understand what does that mean. If fact, VE (VPS) owner can create his own firewall rules, and the host system (physical server) owner can create his own firewall rules as well. Since packets for a VE goes through the host system, it is firewalled on two levels: first in the host system, when in a VE. But to my mind, the quote reads like one can not use firewall if it is not set up in the host system -- and that sounds wrong. Care to elaborate? --K001 11:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: VE firewall

From what i know the iptables modules don't work inside the VPS by themselves, without being loaded on the host machine, and the firewall is applied by the host machine (it checks if new rules are deployed in the VPS). This is the impression I got after researching on how can you run a separate firewall inside your VPS. I might be wrong, and I think you can tell what is the correct manner in which the firewall behaves, since you are an employee of SW-Soft and leader of OpenVZ Project. Can you have a fully featured firewall inside the VPS with no interference from the host machine? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mfdragosh (talk • contribs) 2006-06-14 09:32:21 (UTC).

Your description is slightly wrong. Let me explain it in all the gory details :)
In order for the VE firewall to work, certain iptables modules should be (1) virtualized (done for most of the often-used modules in OpenVZ/Virtuozzo) and (2) loaded on the host machine before starting the given VE. Given that, iptables is working inside a VE and it is really working for the VE interface and "inside the VE", not "on the host machine". Surely a VE owner can not use his own iptables modules since he is not permitted to load any kernel modules (otherwise the security of the whole system is compromised). That is why those modules needs to be preloaded. So the only restrictions are (1) and (2) stated above, other that that this is pretty standard and decent iptables. Hope I made it clear. --K001 18:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
I just restored the note about the firewall, but I had not noticed the discussion here. Please feel free to revert or clarify my change. User:K001 and others are obviously more knowledgeable on the subject than me. Wmahan. 03:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I tried to clarify it on the page and explained it in greater details here. Hope that helps. The only problem is I am talking about the Linux version; I am absolutely unaware of how it is done in LinuxWindows. --K001 19:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Err, you mean you're unaware of how it is done in the Windows version? Regardless, thanks for the clarification. Wmahan. 06:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Yup, I surely meant Windows; sorry for the confusion. --K001 18:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Another thing

Please ask your coworkers to sign their contributions to Wikipedia. I saw anonymous revisions made from va-gw.swsoft.net. I think that exaggerating your products qualities and spreading FUD does not help SW-Soft in the long run. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mfdragosh (talk • contribs) 2006-06-14 09:48:33 (UTC).

I think we should welcome contributions from experts on the subject, even employees of SWsoft. Of course, I fully agree with you about neutrality, and we should continue to educate contributors about the NPOV policy. By the way, don't forget to sign your own edits on talk pages! Wmahan. 03:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Their contribution is more then welcomed, is quite necessary, as long as it is done in a netural way. Sorry about the signature, I've just started using the edit/talk functions and haven't checked all the applied policies. Mfdragosh

[edit] Use VE not VPS

Please use the term VE (Virtual Environment) not VPS (Virtual Private Server) in this article. The term "VPS" came from the hosting providers space and while it is OK, VE or Virtual Environment suits the purpose better (and is more in-line with VM — Virtual Machine). --K001 19:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tone down the advertising

Could someone please tone down the advertising about "SWsoft in particular has proprietary technology that" (isolates vm's from each other). Spare the crap about proprietary technology, just describe in technical terms what it's doing, and how that differs from what other VE systems do. Phr (talk) 05:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I've got to agree. Almost everything is proprietary nowadays. It really doesn't help to say "Windows is a proprietary operating system developed by Microsoft." Saying that "Virtuozzo is a server virtualization product from SWsoft" I think is better and doesn't reduce the clearliness of the "proprietary" word. --Ceefour 01:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ridiculus Article

Needs a complete rewrite because it reads like a sales pitch without mentioning the issues that Virtuozo is riddled with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.245.48.21 (talk) 18:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)