Solaris

You are currently browsing articles tagged Solaris.

I’ve spoken to the folks at eG Innovations a couple of times. In case you didn’t know, eG Innovations makes a product that is designed around managing virtualization environments. eG claims to be unique in that it gathers information from both inside the guest as well as outside the guest (from the host) and correlates the data from the two views.

Today, eG Innovations announced that eG VM Monitor now supports not only VMware ESX and Solaris Containers, but also Citrix XenServer and Solaris Logical Domains (LDoms). In addition, the new version of eG Enterprise Suite provides integration with VMware Virtual Desktop Manager (VDM) to provide greater visibility in a virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) environment.

What I didn’t see in today’s announcement was support for Hyper-V. Given that today was Microsoft’s big virtualization launch event, I kind of expected to see eG announcing Hyper-V support as well.

Tags: , , , ,

Here’s the latest installation of Virtualization Short Takes, my occasionally-weekly view on various virtualization news, reviews, and other happenings. Hopefully I can share something interesting with you!

  • Via VMblog.com, I saw that Transitive Corporation is supporting the use of QuickTransit within Hyper-V virtual machines. This is interesting because it extends the ability of Hyper-V to help customers consolidate applications. QuickTransit, in case you aren’t aware, allows applications written for Solaris/SPARC environments to run in Linux/x86 environments. It was also the technology behind Apple’s Rosetta, which allowed Mac users to run PowerPC apps on Intel Macs. Does anyone know if QuickTransit is supported within VMware VMs, or is this specific to Hyper-V?
  • This one was quite interesting to me. Question #2 is particularly applicable: why is a reboot required, anyway? (Yes, yes, I know—there is a workaround that does not require a reboot. It’s the principle of the matter.)
  • Via various sources on the Internet, I learned about the release of ESX Manager. This looks like quite an interesting tool, although I have not yet had the opportunity to install or try it yet. Anyone out there tried this and have some feedback for us?
  • Every now and then, something comes up about Citrix XenServer and Xen and it makes me wonder about the relationship between Citrix and the open source Xen community. The latest thing is what appears to be an offhand comment by Simon Crosby of Citrix where he says, “Because we own the hypervisor, we can do much more integration and development around it” (read it in context here). What does that mean? What does “ownership” of the Xen hypervisor mean? And if the Xen hypervisor is licensed under an open source license (GNU GPL v2, according to this page), how can Citrix make proprietary extensions to the hypervisor without being forced to release those extensions back to the community? I guess I just don’t understand the relationship there and how it works. This is where the murky waters of a commercial entity “owning” an open source project come into play, in my mind.
  • I ran across this very useful tip for creating a vSwitch with a specific number of ports. It looks like Dwight Hubbard, the maintainer of the site, also has some other interesting posts. Might be worth adding his feed to your RSS reader.
  • Nick Triantos discusses NetApp’s Site Recovery Adapter (SRA) and its role with VMware Site Recovery Manager (SRM). Anyone have any links to similar discussions of the SRAs for other storage vendors?
  • John Howard provides a great breakdown of how Hyper-V generates dynamic MAC addresses and how Hyper-V attempts to protect against MAC collisions in some circumstances.
  • The VI3 Security Hardening Guide has been updated, which is good because some people felt it just didn’t go far enough.
  • VMware re-iterated their stance on being storage protocol agnostic, and in the article included a very useful table that summarizes the various products and technologies and which are supported with which storage protocols. While the rest of the post is helpful, that summary of supported features is probably the most helpful.
  • Interesting in trying out Hyper-V, but don’t have shared storage? Take a look at this blog post. I think you’ll find it helpful.

I’m always on the lookout for other interesting or useful virtualization news, tips, and tricks, so feel free to share with me and other readers in the comments.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

In the Works

I just wanted to provide a quick update on some articles I have in the works to be (hopefully) published soon.

  • I’m working on an article discussing when to use various NIC teaming configurations with VMware ESX. There are some significant repercussions here for a variety of network configurations, but especially so for configurations involving IP-based storage (iSCSI or NFS).
  • I’m finally wrapping up an article on the Xsigo I/O Director. I’ve been working a Xsigo VP780 in the lab for quite some time, and this article will provide a brief overview along with some tips and tricks.
  • I received word from HP that I should be getting a ProCurve switch in my lab soon, so that means I can provide a ProCurve-oriented version of this NIC teaming and VLAN trunking article.
  • I have some notes on using NetApp Open Systems SnapVault (OSSV) in conjunction with VMware ESX that I plan to post here as well.

New versions of the Linux and Solaris AD integration articles are on the way as well, starting with an update of the Solaris instructions to accommodate Solaris 10 Update 5 and Windows Server 2008.

If there’s anything else you’re interested in seeing, let me know in the comments. Thanks for reading!

UPDATE: The NIC utilization article is available here.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

I came across an interesting paper discussing how various virtualization environments protect well-behaved VMs from misbehaving VMs. The paper is available here.

In the tests described in the paper, researchers used virtual machines on Xen 3.0 (the open source hypervisor not the commercial XenServer product, as far as I can tell), VMware Workstation 5.5, and “Open Solaris 10” (quotes mine). As pointed out in the paper, these three environments represent paravirtualization, full virtualization, and OS virtualization (or containers). I’m not sure if the researchers actually meant OpenSolaris; I suspect not since that’s a very recent release. Instead, I believe they probably just meant Solaris 10. On Xen and VMware Workstation, both running under Linux, they used Linux-based VMs; on Solaris, they used additional instances of Solaris. Each VM or instance ran Apache 2 and was tested using physical clients to connect to the HTTP server in each VM.

The results are interesting; VMware showed the best protection of well-behaved VMs from a misbehaving VM, followed by Xen with Solaris Containers providing the least protection. The level of protection was tested using a memory consumption stress test, a CPU stress test, a disk I/O stress test, and a network I/O stress test. I’d encourage you to have a look at the full paper for all the details.

These results are very interesting, but I wonder how much the results would change if we were to use VMware’s ESX server product line instead of one of the hosted products like VMware Workstation? As a product representative of “full virtualization” solutions, I’d be curious to know if the results seen with VMware Workstation were also seen with ESX.

In any case, the results are a validation of what we, as consultants, have been talking about: full virtualization provides the best isolation of well-behaved workloads from ill-behaved workloads, preventing a workload in one VM from affecting other workloads due to mishandling of CPU, RAM, disk, or network resources. As the researchers conclude in the paper, “…it is clear that VMware completely protects the well-behaved VMs under all stress tests. Its performance is sometimes substantially lower for the misbehaving VM, but in a commercial hosting environment this would be exactly the right tradeoff to make.”

Tags: , , , , ,

Some Things I’m Working On

I wanted to take just a brief moment and let everyone know about a few articles that I’ve got “in the pipeline” for the site.  If there is one—or more—of these articles that looks particularly interesting, speak up in the comments.

Here are the articles that are currently under development:

  • An update to the Solaris-AD integration instructions:  Last time I ran through these instructions I came across a number of discrepancies and little “gotchas.”  I need to incorporate the workarounds into the integration instructions and publish a new version.
  • A brief blurb on NetApp OSSV:  NetApp’s Open Systems SnapVault (OSSV) is a pretty cool technology, so I want to take a quick look at setting it up.  I’m also exploring to see what kind of unique synergies may arise from using OSSV in a VMware environment.
  • Restricting access to ESX Server when using AD integration:  As reader Scott Garrett points out in this comment to an earlier article, ESX Server’s version of sshd doesn’t support the UsePAM directive.  This prevents us from using group membership in Active Directory to control access to ESX Server’s Service Console.  Or does it?  I have a hunch that there may be at least one workaround for this problem; once I’ve tested it, I’ll document it here.
  • New iSCSI functionality in ESX Server 3.5:  VMware appears to have refreshed the software iSCSI initiator in ESX Server 3.5, so I want to take a closer look at and discuss here some of this new functionality.

That’s it for now, although I’m certainly open to other items that pique reader interest.  Feel free to submit your suggestions in the comments.  Thanks!

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

This afternoon, I walked back through my own instructions for integrating Solaris 10 and Active Directory, and I found that the process wasn’t as smooth as perhaps I’d believed it to be.  As a result of walking back through the process again myself, I’ve collected some notes.  At some point in the near future, these notes will be integrated into a new version of the Solaris-AD integration instructions.

So, without further ado, here are the notes I collected in no particular order:

  • The Blastwave Samba package does not create it’s own smb.conf file in /opt/csw/etc/samba.  This is correctly pointed out in the latest integration instructions, but I wanted to mention it again here.  You’ll need to manually create the /opt/csw/etc/samba/smb.conf file before attempting to join the Solaris server to Active Directory via the ‘net ads join’ command.
  • The defaultServerList portion of the ‘ldapclient manual’ command only supports IP addresses.  The LDAP client service kept going into maintenance mode when using hostnames.  On a hunch, I substituted IP addresses for hostnames, and it worked.  Go figure.
  • Apparently, you can’t use ‘ldapclient mod’ to change an existing attribute map.  I had a hunch about resolving a co-existence issue where both Solaris and Linux are both authenticating against Active Directory—more on that particular topic is coming soon as well—and needed to change the attribute maps for the homedirectory and loginshell attributes.  I ended up editing the ldap_client_file manually (found in /var/ldap; must be made writable using chmod) in order to make the change.  If anyone has a more elegant fix, please let me know.
  • The ‘net ads join’ command correctly creates a Kerberos keytab with the appropriate entries, but places it in the wrong location.  On my test system, it placed the krb5.keytab file in the /etc directory, and Solaris expected it to be in /etc/krb5 instead.  Until I moved that file, authentication against Active Directory consistently failed.
  • It turns out that it’s not really necessary to enable the DNS client using ’svcadm enable svc:/network/dns/client:default’; from what I’ve been able to gather, that’s there as a dependency only.  The ‘nslookup’ and ‘host’ commands seemed to work just fine with this service still disabled.

Again, I’ll be incorporating these changes into a future version of the Solaris-AD integration instructions.  I hope to have that complete within the next week or two, so stay tuned.  In addition, I have information coming to help with the co-existence of multiple UNIX and UNIX-like operating systems all authenticating against the same Active Directory forest, so keep your eyes peeled for that as well.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Apparently, I’m Ahead Too

I used to read Tom Yager’s “Ahead of the Curve” column when InfoWorld was still a print publication.  Every month, without fail, as soon as the magazine arrived I turned right to his column.  It was one of my primary reasons for reading the magazine, at least in recent years.  I think it’s probably safe to say that Yager’s affection for Mac OS X led me to perform an evaluation of my own and, eventually, to switch to Mac OS X myself based on the results of that personal evaluation.

But then the magazine turned digital/online only, and I stopped following his column.  I already had enough stuff coming in to my various digital inboxes, and didn’t really need another.  Part of the allure of the column had been precisely that it wasn’t digital.

Fast forward to just the other day, when I stumble across his column once more and find that I, too, am “ahead of the curve.”  In his recent article The next best thing to OS X, Yager claims that Sun Solaris 10 is a great fit for places where Mac OS X isn’t.

Given that I have embarked upon a plan to learn Solaris, it’s kind of nice to see an “industry analyst” say that you’re making the right move and that you, too, are ahead of the curve.

Tags: , ,

Regular readers of this blog know that I like to work on integrating various systems into Active Directory.  I’ve written a couple of articles on the issue:

Linux-AD Integration, Version 4
Solaris 10-AD Integration, Version 3
Active Directory Integration Index

These articles have been pretty successful and from what I understand have helped a fair number of people integrate their non-Windows systems into Active Directory for simplified user management and authentication.  Occasionally, though, we run into the odd issue that isn’t quite so straightforward to resolve.

For example, I recently had a reader (let’s call him Johnny) who was having a difficult time getting the Linux-AD integration to work.  The “ldapsearch” and “kinit” commands worked fine, but “getent passwd” or “getent group” failed with no output.  The users in Active Directory did indeed have UNIX attributes added to their accounts.  There were no firewalls between the non-Windows systems and the Active Directory domain controllers, and there did not appear to be any connectivity issues whatsoever (this further underscored by the fact that “ldapsearch” successfully returned LDAP search results from AD, and “kinit” successfully obtained a Kerberos ticket from AD).  We were stumped.

Johnny and I traded e-mails back and forth a few times, until finally Johnny found his error and notified me about what had been happening.  As I read the description about the problem, I realized that this may be a problem that is affecting a lot of users, and may, in fact, have stumped some of you out there reading right now.  Here’s the details.

The method that I suggest using for AD integration uses two parts:

  • First, we use Kerberos to obtain a Kerberos ticket from an Active Directory domain controller (also a Kerberos key distribution center, or KDC).  This handles the authentication side of things and prevents the password from crossing the wire at any point in time.
  • Next, we use LDAP to centrally store account information, such as UID number, GID number, home directory, login shell, etc.  This is the part that typically requires schema extensions (although there is a workaround for that) and using this technique ensures that we don’t have to manage accounts individually on each Linux server.

This approach doesn’t work without both pieces.  The Kerberos authentication takes care of the password, but without account information logins still fail.  So if Kerberos works but LDAP doesn’t, logins will fail.  If Kerberos doesn’t work but LDAP is fine, logins will fail.  So part of troubleshooting this configuration is isolating where the problem lies.  In this particular case, “kinit” worked fine—no error was returned and “klist” showed a valid Kerberos ticket.  So the problem had to be with LDAP.  But where?  The “ldapsearch” command worked fine.

The problem lie with the /etc/ldap.conf file.  See, the nss_ldap libraries (which are responsible for using LDAP—and other sources, as defined in /etc/nsswitch.conf—as the backend information database for account information) are controlled by this file, but “ldapsearch” does not use it.  Specifically, the error was with the account that is used to bind (or connect) to Active Directory to perform the searches.

There are two ways of specifying this account in /etc/ldap.conf.  You can use the full DN, which looks something like “cn=Scott Lowe,cn=Users,dc=example,dc=com” or “cn=John Smith,ou=Marketing,ou=Departments,dc=example,dc=com”.  Alternately, you can use the universal principal name (UPN), which looks something like an e-mail address, such as “slowe@example.com” or “john.smith@example.com”.  In this particular case, Johnny (our reader with the problem) was using the full DN, but he was using the wrong attribute in the DN.  Here’s the information he had:

First Name: John
Last Name: Smith
Full Name: John Smith
Display Name: John Smith
UPN: jsmith@example.com
SAM Account Name (downlevel logon name): jsmith
Object name: jsmith

Which of these do you suppose should be used in the DN?  Full name?  No.  Display name?  No.  It must be the object name, in this case “jsmith”.  You can double-check your object name (or CN) using ADSI Edit or a similar utility.  You could use Active Directory Users and Computers, but that’s typically the confusing part.  In any case, once Johnny fixed the syntax for the bind account then “getent passwd” and “getent group” worked like a champ.

How do we avoid this kind of issue?  Simple: just use the UPN instead of the full DN.  This syntax works just as well and avoids the potential problem of using the wrong name when building the full DN.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

I’ve been looking forward to Solaris 10 8/07 (Update 4) for a while now, eager to see what new technologies and features have been baked into the stable Solaris 10 code base.  I won’t go into all the new bells and whistles, partly because I’m just not knowledgeable enough about them to them justice, and partly because it’s been done better elsewhere.

I didn’t really expect any problems when I went to install Update 4 on ESX Server 3.0.2, and Solaris didn’t disappoint.  The new update installed quickly and flawlessly, and VMware Tools installed without a hitch.  After installation, I modified the VM configuration to use the Intel e1000 driver, mostly because I know that the e1000 driver is supported for VLAN interfaces, something I have been and will continue to be experimenting with over the next day or so.

<aside>By the way, if you’re having problems getting changes to the VMX file to stick (i.e., if VirtualCenter keeps overwriting your changes), then remove the VM from inventory, edit the file, then browse the datastore and add the VM back to inventory.  Your changes to the VMX file will now stick.</aside>

Now that I have Update 4 running on ESX Server, the next step is to try using Solaris Containers (zones) on the virtualized instance, as well as testing the new iSCSI target functionality in Solaris to provide iSCSI storage for the ESX hosts.  I’ll post more information here (it may be slightly delayed because I’ll be in San Francisco next week at VMworld) as soon as I’ve had the opportunity to conduct those tests and have some results.

Tags: , , , ,

SUNW to JAVA

I’m not a Solaris expert, nor a SPARC expert, nor even a longtime user of their products.  But I do have a lot of respect for their recent engineering efforts in the x86 space, particularly those hardware products released since Andy Bechtolsheim’s return with the acquisition of Kealia a couple of years ago.  The move to open-source Solaris, the increasing visibility of OpenSolaris, the introduction of exciting new technologies such as ZFS…all these things have been building up the “tech cred” that Sun needs to win back (or continue to hold on to) the hearts and minds of technical leaders.  And then this happens—they announce they’re changing the stock ticker symbol from SUNW to JAVA.  Huh?

Is it just me, or does this not make sense?  I suppose I kind of see the reasoning behind the move, although I don’t agree with the reasoning.  It all smacks of rebranding all the products with Java, even though most of them didn’t (and don’t) have anything to do with Java.

It all just seems silly to me.

Tags: ,

« Older entries