Skip to main content

DMTF's open standard for System Virtualization Management


Novell and other industry partners helped create an open source implementation of the the System Virtualization standard for Linux, and Novell ships this implementation with SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10. Novell’s ZENworks VM Builder, VM Warehouse and VM Orchestrator products are designed to manage Virtualization technologies that support the same standard. ZENworks VM Builder is a DMTF Common Information Model (CIM) based service that provides automation for building VMs to a specification derived from the System Virtualization standard, and ZENworks VM Warehouse is a CIM based service that provides version control for both Virtual Machine configuration settings and operating system image files. ZENworks Orchestrator deploys VMs to production servers based on a declarative specification of VM requirements encoded also in CIM format, that allows deterministic matching of service-level (VM) requirements with available infrastructure capabilities - Orchestrator deploys VMs to capable hardware based on a variety of extensible constraints such as CPU type, memory, network or storage accessibility, or even availability considerations such as clustered servers required for production versus single servers used for testing or maintenance.


Check out Novell's Orchestrator Screen Dump:

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more