OpenStack Ditches Microsoft Hyper-V 73
judgecorp writes "The OpenStack open source cloud project has removed Hyper-V from its infrastructure as a service (IaaS) framework, saying Microsoft's support for its hypervisor technology is 'broken.' This will embarass Microsoft, as major partners such as Dell and HP support OpenStack, along with service providers such as Internap." Adds reader alphadogg, this "means the code will be removed when the next version of OpenStack, called Essex, is released in the second quarter."
Wrong Summary (Score:4, Informative)
As I read the article, it says that OpenStep's support for Hyper-V is broken or incomplete, leading to its removal from of Hyper-V support from the OpenStep codebase. The summary here could be read either as Microsoft support for OpenStep is broken, or Microsoft support for its own Hyper-V product is broken, neither of which appears to be the case.
In other words, OpenStep users haven't adopted Hyper-V widely or spent a lot of time working on the OpenStep code, and so that part of the tree has fallen into disrepair and it's being removed as not having sufficient interest.
That's my guess...perhaps someone with more knowledge could clarify?
“Just as Nova enters feature freeze, it sounds like a good moment to consider removing deprecated, known-buggy-and-unmaintained or useless feature code from the Essex tree, “ he wrote.
In reply, Ken Pepple, director of cloud development at Internap Network Services, wrote: “”Hyper-V support is missing support for even the most basic functions – volumes, Glance, several network managers, etc. We investigated it for our service, but found it only borderline functional.”
Re:Maybe it's just too hard... (Score:4, Informative)
It's not hard to believe Hyper-V is broken
About 2 years ago, the Linux kernel devs threatened to kick the Hyper-V kernel driver out of mainline because of lack of maintenance
The original guys from MS who submitted the code just disappeared, not responding to emails or requests for code clean-up
Not sure what MS's game is with Hyper-V, but they don't seem that interested in making a decent hypervisor....
Read the original ML message (Score:4, Informative)
If you read the ML message (here : https://lists.launchpad.net/openstack/msg07065.html) you'll see all the reasons.
Re:Maybe it's just too hard... (Score:4, Informative)
But it is Microsoft's code. (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft has been trying to push Hyper-V support into Linux, but their original driver code was complete shit, and it's just barely starting to get better. It's almost stable now, but not fully functional. So, yes it is fair to say that Hyper-V support is being removed from OpenStack because Microsoft's support for Hyper-V on Linux has been very poor.
Re:Maybe it's just too hard... (Score:5, Informative)
Here is the key passage from the article, should you read it.
The "They" is Microsoft, and the guy saying it is person Microsoft has a liaison for the project.
Also, it is too hard to maintain code you don't have control over. Microsoft drafted someone else to develop the code, that organization was bought by Citrix who owns Zen Hyper-V, a competing project. Again mentioned in the article.
So, this is not just normal Microsoft Bashing by /. (well, it is) this is something that Microsoft deserves. Microsoft better start focusing on core competencies to support of Enterprise Infrastructure and Windows or it is going to find itself shrinking rapidly.
Re:Maybe it's just too hard... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Wrong Summary (Score:5, Informative)
As I read the article
Frankly, you'd better read the Openstack dev list thread about "dead wood cutting" on launchpad [launchpad.net], because that's where the article is taking information from (where else could this info be?). It has *never* been said that OpenStack is "ditching" Hyper-V by the way, but that it's just being removed from the Essex release, because it's currently in frozen state (currently only bugfix are accepted, until Essex is released), and Hyper-V isn't up-to-shape.
Re:Maybe it's just too hard... (Score:5, Informative)
HyperV has many more dependencies than other virtualization stuff.
For example,.if your host and management client are not in the same AD domain but you want to use MMC to remote manage a HyperV host (say you do not want to allow multiple people to remote desktop to the host), to configure the permissions and other stuff you often have to download and run an _unsupported_ tool: http://archive.msdn.microsoft.com/HVRemote [microsoft.com]
Or wade through 5 pages of stuff:
http://blogs.technet.com/b/jhoward/archive/2008/03/28/part-1-hyper-v-remote-management-you-do-not-have-the-requested-permission-to-complete-this-task-contact-the-administrator-of-the-authorization-policy-for-the-computer-computername.aspx [technet.com]
And even so, it often still doesn't work, e.g. the added firewall rules might not work for some stupid reason and you have to turn off the firewalls completely.
In contrast with VMware you need a lot few number of ports opened to do remote management, and you normally won't have problems getting remote management. In fact it's almost a "given" that you'd be mainly using remote management.
HyperV may also not work so well if you're not running Linux guests. Recently a colleague had a problem with a Linux guest- some (ICMP echo) frames/packets were being sent but not others (ARP replies)! I solved it by restarting the hyper-v virtual switch. Perhaps that HyperV server was not updated. Whatever it is, even vmware GSX server years ago caused me fewer problems than HyperV.
Re:Maybe it's just too hard... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Maybe it's just too hard... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This is what confuses me... (Score:4, Informative)