| 1 |
--On November 3, 2006 12:04:33 PM -0500 7v5w7go9ub0o |
| 2 |
<7v5w7go9ub0o@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Lots of interest in VMs lately - Is this to increase security (isolating |
| 6 |
> servers and components in case one is compromised)? Or perhaps you are |
| 7 |
> isolating components for the purpose of evaluating them? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
there are additional benefits, mainly for enterprise use, such as being |
| 10 |
able to move the virtual server to a new box in case of failure of the |
| 11 |
first box. This is much cheaper than maintaining an identically configured |
| 12 |
second box. VMWare's high-end (not free) product can do this automatically |
| 13 |
if partnered with a SAN. Using SAN technology the second box could even be |
| 14 |
off-site, providing a virtually instant disaster recovery plan (just not a |
| 15 |
cheap one.) |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
You could even save the cost of redundant box by using Amazon's Elastic |
| 18 |
Compute Cloud as your redundancy. Keep a copy of the image on Amazon S3 |
| 19 |
then fire up the image if the main one goes down. Might be a bit slower |
| 20 |
but that beats being down. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Also snapshot technology is getting pretty cool, where you can take a |
| 23 |
snapshot, upgrade a virtual box, and if the upgrade fails just roll back to |
| 24 |
the snapshot. Beats a backup/restore cycle by a mile. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-security@g.o mailing list |
Archives