Search Results

Search found 39 results on 2 pages for 'proxmox'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

• OpenVZ vs KVM for Linux VMs

  - by Eliasdx

  Hardware: Intel® Core™ i7-920, 12 GB DDR3 RAM, 2 x 1500 GB SATA-II HDD (no SoftRaid because Proxmox developers don't support softraid and they are sure you'll run into problems) Software: Proxmox VE with KVM and OpenVZ support and debian everywhere I want to run multiple Linux VMs on this server. One for a firewall (I want to try pfSense), one for MySQL, one VM for nginx (my stuff) and ~2 VMs with nginx for other people's web sites. I don't think that pfSense will run in an OpenVZ environment but it should run in KVM. The question is if I should setup the other VMs using KVM or OpenVZ. In OpenVZ they should have less overhead for the OS itself but I don't know about the performance. I heard that KVM is more stable but needs more RAM and CPU. I found this diagram showing a OpenVZ setup on the same hardware I'm using. This guy uses an own VM for each and every website which is running on his server. I can't think of any advantage why he's using so many VMs.

  Read the article

• Routing public IPs (each a /32) through a VPN to another server

  - by Lee S

  Hopefully the title makes sense; I have a server currently in a colo facility, with many IP addresses routed to it. They are individual IPs and not in a contiguous block. Due to vastly improved connectivity (fibre) at home I am slowly bringing my infrastructure in-house for managability and eventually, cost savings. What I would like to do though is use the IP addresses allocated to my existing server, at home. I have an IP block allocated to me on my new ISP connection, but for a couple of reasons I'd like to make use of the colo ones for now: Ease of transition - lots of domains, dns, hard-coded IPs in programs, etc. Connectivity fallback. If my primary line goes down and switches to fallback 1 (dsl) or fallback 2 (4G), I lose access to the ISP-allocated IP block of IPs that are only presented on the primary WAN interface. What I'd like to achieve is my home virtualisation server (Proxmox/Debian-based) "dials in" to the colo server in the colo facility (also Proxmox/Debian) via VPN or similar, and gets to make use of the IP addresses that currently terminate on the colo box. If the primary connection to my ISP goes down and one of the fallback routes kicks in, the VPN tunnel will just time out and then be re-established on the backup connection instead. I'm sure this is doable, but I have no idea how. I'm not afraid to get my hands dirty, I just don't really know where to start?

  Read the article

• Virtual DNS recommended setup...

  - by luison

  Hi. We are new to virtualization which we are setting up with Proxmox VE (OpenVZ + KVM). I am a bit lost about the recommended DNS forwarder config specially in the OpenVZ (Virtuosso type) of enviroiment. Our intention was to have a small dnsmasq running in one of the VM acting as backup DHCP server and serving our in-office local addresses (and PCs) by an additional resolve.conf file which dnsmasq supports, but I've read that all VM should share DNS pointing to the host machine in which case it would make more sense having it there. My problem is that I would like to have as least as possible apps in the host so a reinstall of the environment (porxmox ve) and a machine restore can be as quick as possible. Does anyone have a similar setup? Does it make sense to have the 1st virtual machine running the local dns forwarder? Also... dnsmasq seems to want to have root permissions when running on an OpenVZ container... are there any work arrounds anyone knows for that.

  Read the article

• Virtual environment firewall with CSF + iptables rules on VM?

  - by luison

  We are getting into virtualization with a Proxmox VE (OpenVZ + KVM) server. Our plan for firewall is to have CSF (http://configserver.com/cp/csf.html) running on the host machine as we've had a reasonable good experience with it in the past. Apart from that we plan simple firewall rules on the VM machines (mostly OpenVZ containers with same kernel) and maybe fail2ban simple specific rules. I would appreciate comments with anyone with similar experiences? I understand all traffic comes via the host machine so a combined firewall there with specific firewalling on the VM should work, alltough some iptables rules are hard to get to work on OpenVZ containers.

  Read the article

• Allowing outbound traffic with APF/iptables for OpenVZ container

  - by David

  I have apf installed on a OpenVZ container (proxmox 2.1). The config is pretty much vanilla and things are working. My external services like ssh and http are working. My problem is that all outbound traffic on http/https is blocked. How do I allow all outbound traffic for http/https. If I change EGF to 1 like this, all inbound and outbound traffic gets blocked EGF="1" EG_TCP_CPORTS="21,25,80,443,43,53" EG_UDP_CPORTS="20,21,53" EG_ICMP_TYPES="all" I opened a single outbound rule with the following # /usr/local/sbin/apf -a downloads.wordpress.org How do I allow all outbound traffic on http/https without blocking all traffic? Why would I allow all inbound ssh/http traffic and block all outbound traffic?

  Read the article

• Different Servers for incoming mails

  - by André

  Hi everybody, not sure if what I want is possible so I´d appreciate any pointers. I have full control over the infrastructure (DNS and servers) Currently I receive mails for domain.tld. MX record for domain.tld is gw.domain.tld. gw then does some spam and virus checking and forwards the mails to the internal exchange server. GW is a Proxmox Mail Gateway Box (Free license) Now what I want is to distribute mails for different recipients to other mail servers. Basicly I only want [email protected] and [email protected] to go to the exchange as before, but all others go to a different mail server (based on linux). Any idea how I could achieve this?

  Read the article

• Add physical disk to KVM virtual machine

  - by evan

  I'm setting up a file server (nas4free) as a KVM virtual machine on a Ubuntu Server 12.04 system. How do I add physical hard drives directly to the VM so they can be used by the guest (nas4free), but not the host? Specifically the hard drive I'd like to mount is /dev/sda (which is not currently mounted on the server.) So far I've found two solutions but I haven't gotten either to work. The first is from Server Fault where it's suggested to use virt-manager. I haven't gotent this to work because when I try to select an existing drive nothing is being listed. My best guess as to why this is, is because I'm using virt-manager over ssh and not connecting as root, should that make a difference? The second solution I've found here is to just run the command (modified for my system) qm set nas4free -virtio /dev/sda but that seems to require proxmox which I don't have installed and doesn't seem to be in the default repositories? Finally, once the above is sorted out and I can mount the drive directly to the VM, does anyone have an experience with whether the drive should be mounted to the VM as scsi, ide, or virtio? (I know virtio was recommend in the linked ServerFault page, but I hadn't heard of it before now since I mainly use VMWare). Thanks for your help!!!

  Read the article

• qemu-img: Could not open $FILE

  - by HTTP500

  I received a single-file VMDK from a vendor that has a virtual appliance for a particular product I'm interested in evaluating. We run a KVM solution (Proxmox) so I tried converting the file but on that system qemu-img blows up. (I was able to convert (multipart) VMDK files from bitnami without error.) So I figured I'll just yum install qemu-img on a RHEL 6.3 VM and do it there. But despite the fact that I can file the file just fine when I run qemu-img on it I get this error that it can't open the file: [root@host dir]# file 1.vmdk 1.vmdk: VMware4 disk image [root@host dir]# qemu-img info 1.vmdk qemu-img: Could not open 'vmdk' I've seen some other people post on the interwebs that they've had this problem but none of them seem to have a resolution. Does anyone have any ideas? I have checked the MD5SUM already. EDIT1: [root@host dir]# qemu-img info -f vmdk 1.vmdk qemu-img: Could not open '1.vmdk' EDIT2: Ran strace per suggestion. Not sure what to look for... Here is a possible: ioctl(3, CDROM_DRIVE_STATUS, 0x7fffffff) = -1 ENOTTY (Inappropriate ioctl for device)

  Read the article

• Change OpenVZ route to pass through ip failover

  - by Kevin Campion

  I have one dedicaced server with its own IP and another IP (failover) who refer to the first. I will wish to change the gateway of a Proxmox virtual machine (openvz) who runs on this dedicaced server to go through the failover IP rather than the ip of host main server. Once connected to a virtual machine, when I do a traceroute VE# traceroute www.google.fr traceroute to www.google.fr (209.85.229.104), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 MY_SERVER_NAME.ovh.net (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx FIRST_IP_MAIN_SERVER) 0.021 ms 0.010 ms 0.009 ms The first line tells me the ip of host main server. I would like that the traceroute display the second IP failover. VE# route Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 192.0.2.1 * 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 venet0 default 192.0.2.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 venet0 With iptables HOST# iptables -t nat -L Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination MASQUERADE all -- anywhere anywhere MASQUERADE all -- anywhere anywhere SNAT tcp -- anywhere 10.10.101.2 tcp dpt:www state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED,UNTRACKED to:SECOND_IP_FAILOVER SNAT all -- 10.10.101.2 anywhere to:SECOND_IP_FAILOVER 10.10.101.2 is the virtual machine IP (interface venet0) Any ideas ?

  Read the article

• ipv6 with KVM on debian

  - by Eliasdx

  I have trouble setting up IPV6 on my Proxmox (KVM) server: My ISP sent me this information(xxx=placeholder): IPs: 2a01:XXX:XXX:301:: /64 Gateway: 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 /59 This is the interface setup on the host server: auto vmbr1 iface vmbr1 inet static address 178.XX.XX.4 broadcast 178.XX.XX.63 netmask 255.255.255.192 pointopoint 178.XX.XX.1 gateway 178.XX.XX.1 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 iface vmbr1 inet6 static address 2a01:XXX:XXX:301::2 netmask 64 up ip -6 route add 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 down ip -6 route del 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 up ip -6 route add default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 down ip -6 route del default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 On the guest: auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 178.xx.xx.47 netmask 255.255.255.255 broadcast 178.xx.xx.63 gateway 178.xx.xx.1 pointopoint 178.xx.xx.1 iface eth0 inet6 static pre-up modprobe ipv6 address 2a01:XXX:XXX:301::2:2 netmask 64 up ip -6 route add 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev eth0 down ip -6 route del 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev eth0 up ip -6 route add default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev eth0 down ip -6 route del default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev eth0 Ipv4 works on both host and guest but Ipv6 only works "sometimes". It's up for minutes and then down again until I change something. However I can actually ping the host and the guest from both host and guest. host:~# ip -6 neigh 2a01:XXX:XXX:301::100:2 dev vmbr1 lladdr 00:50:56:00:00:e0 REACHABLE 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 lladdr 00:26:88:76:18:18 router STALE host:~# ip -6 route 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 metric 1024 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 2a01:XXX:XXX:301::/64 dev vmbr1 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev vmbr0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev vmbr1 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev tap101i1d0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 metric 1024 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 Does someone know why it isn't working? And is there a way to configure multiple v6 IPs from the same subnet so I can dedicate IPs to websites on a server with multiple virtualhosts?

  Read the article

• ipv6 with KVM on debian

  - by Eliasdx

  I have trouble setting up IPV6 on my Proxmox (KVM) server: My ISP sent me this information(xxx=placeholder): IPs: 2a01:XXX:XXX:301:: /64 Gateway: 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 /59 This is the interface setup on the host server: auto vmbr1 iface vmbr1 inet static address 178.XX.XX.4 broadcast 178.XX.XX.63 netmask 255.255.255.192 pointopoint 178.XX.XX.1 gateway 178.XX.XX.1 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 iface vmbr1 inet6 static address 2a01:XXX:XXX:301::2 netmask 64 up ip -6 route add 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 down ip -6 route del 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 up ip -6 route add default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 down ip -6 route del default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 On the guest: auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 178.xx.xx.47 netmask 255.255.255.255 broadcast 178.xx.xx.63 gateway 178.xx.xx.1 pointopoint 178.xx.xx.1 iface eth0 inet6 static pre-up modprobe ipv6 address 2a01:XXX:XXX:301::2:2 netmask 64 up ip -6 route add 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev eth0 down ip -6 route del 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev eth0 up ip -6 route add default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev eth0 down ip -6 route del default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev eth0 Ipv4 works on both host and guest but Ipv6 only works "sometimes". It's up for minutes and then down again until I change something. However I can actually ping the host and the guest from both host and guest. host:~# ip -6 neigh 2a01:XXX:XXX:301::100:2 dev vmbr1 lladdr 00:50:56:00:00:e0 REACHABLE 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 lladdr 00:26:88:76:18:18 router STALE host:~# ip -6 route 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 metric 1024 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 2a01:XXX:XXX:301::/64 dev vmbr1 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev vmbr0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev eth0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev vmbr1 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 fe80::/64 dev tap101i1d0 proto kernel metric 256 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 default via 2a01:XXX:XXX:300::1 dev vmbr1 metric 1024 mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295 Does someone know why it isn't working? And is there a way to configure multiple v6 IPs from the same subnet so I can dedicate IPs to websites on a server with multiple virtualhosts?

  Read the article

• SSH hangs when executing command remotely

  - by Serty Oan

  Client : OpenSSH_5.1p1 Debian-5ubuntu1 (Ubuntu 9.04) Server : OpenSSH_5.1p1 Debian-5 (Proxmox 2.6.24-7-pve) I use SSH to execute commands remotely on the server (module check_by_ssh of Nagios). But SSH hangs from time to time when trying to execute commands. I can log to the server via SSH but not executing a simple 'ls'. And it seems to block from all clients from the same IP address. Authentication is not the problem, may it be made by SSH keys or password. ssh -l root -p 2222 server.domain.tld 'ls' Here the client debug info debug1: Entering interactive session. debug2: callback start debug2: client_session2_setup: id 0 debug1: Sending environment. debug3: Ignored env ORBIT_SOCKETDIR *** skipping approx 40 env var ignored debug1: Sending command: ls debug2: channel 0: request exec confirm 1 It hangs there. Then after a random time, it works again (without doing anything). Killing all sshd process on the server seems to work too. It works from a Putty. I saw that some people had trouble like this due to ISP reverse DNS problem, but it does not seem to be the case here. It can work for hours and then not work for half an hour or so. What could explain this behaviour ?

  Read the article

• How to disable or tune filesystem cache sharing for OpenVZ?

  - by gertvdijk

  For OpenVZ, an example of container-based virtualization, it seems that host and all guests are sharing the filesystem cache. This sounds paradoxical when talking about virtualization, but this is actually a feature of OpenVZ. It makes sense too. Because only one kernel is running, it's possible to benefit from sharing the same pages of filesystem cache in memory. And while it sounds beneficial, I think a set up here actually suffers in performance from it. Here's why I think why: my machines aren't actually sharing any files on disk so I can't benefit from this feature in OpenVZ. Several OpenVZ machines are running MySQL with MyISAM tables. MyISAM relies on the system's filesystem cache for caching of data files, unlike InnoDB's buffer pool. Also some virtual machines are known to do heavy and large I/O operations on the same filesystem in the host. For example, when running cat *.MYD > /dev/null on some large database in one machine, I saw the filesystem cache lowering in another, monitored by htop. This essentially flushes all the useful filesystem cache in guests (FIFO) and so it flushes the MySQL caches in the guests. Now users are complaining that MySQL is very slow. And it is. Some simple SELECT queries take several seconds on times disk I/O is heavily used by other machines. So, simply put: Is there a way to avoid filesystem cache being wiped out by other virtual machines in container-based virtualization? Some thoughts: Choosing algorithm for flushing filesystem cache in the kernel. (possible? how?) Reserving a certain amount of pages for a single VM. (seems no option for filesystem cache type of pages that reading man vzctl) Will running MySQL on another filesystem get me anywhere? If not, I think my alternatives are: Use KVM for MySQL-MyISAM running VMs. KVM actually assigns memory to the VM and does not allow swapping out caches unless using a balloon driver. Move to InnoDB and tune the buffer pools, dirty pages, etc. This is now considered to be 'nice to have' on the long-term as not everyone responsible for administration of the system understands InnoDB. more suggestions welcome. System software: Proxmox (now 1.9, could be upgraded to 2.x). One big LV assigned for the VMs.

  Read the article

• iptables not allowing mysql connections to aliased ips?

  - by Curtis

  I have a fairly simple iptables firewall on a server that provides MySQL services, but iptables seems to be giving me very inconsistent results. The default policy on the script is as follows: iptables -P INPUT DROP I can then make MySQL public with the following rule: iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT With this rule in place, I can connect to MySQL from any source IP to any destination IP on the server without a problem. However, when I try to restrict access to just three IPs by replacing the above line with the following, I run into trouble (xxx=masked octect): iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.XXX.XXX.184 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.XXX.XXX.196 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.XXX.XXX.251 -j ACCEPT Once the above rules are in place, the following happens: I can connect to the MySQL server from the .184, .196 and .251 hosts just fine as long as am connecting to the MySQL server using it's default IP address or an IP alias in the same subnet as the default IP address. I am unable to connect to MySQL using IP aliases that are assigned to the server from a different subnet than the server's default IP when I'm coming from the .184 or .196 hosts, but .251 works just fine. From the .184 or .196 hosts, a telnet attempt just hangs... # telnet 209.xxx.xxx.22 3306 Trying 209.xxx.xxx.22... If I remove the .251 line (making .196 the last rule added), the .196 host still can not connect to MySQL using IP aliases (so it's not the order of the rules that is causing the inconsistent behavior). I know, this particular test was silly as it shouldn't matter what order these three rules are added in, but I figured someone might ask. If I switch back to the "public" rule, all hosts can connect to the MySQL server using either the default or aliased IPs (in either subnet): iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -j ACCEPT The server is running in a CentOS 5.4 OpenVZ/Proxmox container (2.6.32-4-pve). And, just in case you prefer to see the problem rules in the context of the iptables script, here it is (xxx=masked octect): # Flush old rules, old custom tables /sbin/iptables --flush /sbin/iptables --delete-chain # Set default policies for all three default chains /sbin/iptables -P INPUT DROP /sbin/iptables -P FORWARD DROP /sbin/iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT # Enable free use of loopback interfaces /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT # All TCP sessions should begin with SYN /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp ! --syn -m state --state NEW -j DROP # Accept inbound TCP packets (Do this *before* adding the 'blocked' chain) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow the server's own IP to connect to itself /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -s 208.xxx.xxx.178 -j ACCEPT # Add the 'blocked' chain *after* we've accepted established/related connections # so we remain efficient and only evaluate new/inbound connections /sbin/iptables -N BLOCKED /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -j BLOCKED # Accept inbound ICMP messages /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p ICMP --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p ICMP --icmp-type 11 -j ACCEPT # ssh (private) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW -s xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx -j ACCEPT # ftp (private) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 21 -m state --state NEW -s xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx -j ACCEPT # www (public) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # smtp (public) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 25 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 2525 -j ACCEPT # pop (public) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 110 -j ACCEPT # mysql (private) /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.xxx.xxx.184 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.xxx.xxx.196 -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 3306 -m state --state NEW -s 208.xxx.xxx.251 -j ACCEPT Any ideas? Thanks in advance. :-)

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2