<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>JoeShmoe Tracker</title>
    <link>https://communities.vmware.com/wbsdv95928/tracker</link>
    <description>JoeShmoe Tracker</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 25 Nov 2023 10:53:05 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:date>2023-11-25T10:53:05Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Advice - View Client on re-purposed PC's</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/Advice-View-Client-on-re-purposed-PC-s/m-p/2095631#M54242</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;If we wanted to take old XP desktop PC's and repuprose them as thin clients what's the best/accepted way to enable a view client on these devices and retain all key functions such as DNS, DHCP etc?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Are there available Linux distributions for example that include the View client? Or is there a better option (PXE boot etc). Appreciate any advice as new to View/Thin clients&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:24:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/Advice-View-Client-on-re-purposed-PC-s/m-p/2095631#M54242</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-12-15T13:24:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hosted Application streaming</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/ThinApp/Hosted-Application-streaming/m-p/2543671#M6222</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="#943634" __jive_macro_name="color"&gt;We currently have a system that because of firewall port issues&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="#943634" __jive_macro_name="color"&gt; (i.e. it uses any port it can) has to run via a Citrix front end. Because of&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="#943634" __jive_macro_name="color"&gt; the way Citrix works with VM’s this means we have to use 5 separate Citrix&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="#943634" __jive_macro_name="color"&gt; servers and may now have to use more as customer wants to extend usage (its&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="#943634" __jive_macro_name="color"&gt; something like 50 users max per Citrix instance)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="12pt" __jive_macro_name="size"&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="#943634" __jive_macro_name="color"&gt;What I want to know is – can we use our NetApp storage platform to host the application and have ThinApp ‘stream’ that application to the
desktop over one protocol (i.e. RDP). Similar to hosted application streaming in XenApp we’d want to deliver the application to the SAN and connect each user
to a remote session running their application. The application on the SAN would then have to connect to the back end database server such that the only
connection between the desktop and the data centre was via RDP (or one protocol)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="12pt" __jive_macro_name="size"&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="#943634" __jive_macro_name="color"&gt; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="12pt" __jive_macro_name="size"&gt;&lt;SPAN __default_attr="#943634" __jive_macro_name="color"&gt;Can you let me know if this is possible, what sort of architecture we’d need, a quick idea of how it works at the back end and a rough idea of license costs&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Many tks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:14:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/ThinApp/Hosted-Application-streaming/m-p/2543671#M6222</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-11-05T16:14:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: View and ThinApp</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/View-and-ThinApp/m-p/827666#M18204</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks Jae&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In your experience how does this impact the storage footprint on the linked clones? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 09:00:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/View-and-ThinApp/m-p/827666#M18204</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-10-08T09:00:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: View and ThinApp</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/View-and-ThinApp/m-p/827664#M18202</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks Lee&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Where you say the following&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; "&lt;SPAN class="jive-thread-reply-body-container"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;integrate it into your&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;base image using a virtual registry and file structure and you can do&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;app streaming, but this will defeat you purpose to keep master image&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;small as streaming will download the blocks of data reqiured start the&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;application and then blocks reqiured to run different components of the&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;application"&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Would this only affect the linked clones and not the master? Given it does I assume it does increase the size of the clone differential thus increasing the overall footprint? But then I guess you get the benefit of application virtualisation as opposed to mutliple larger master images?  &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; If you run all apps off a central fileshare (i.e storage mount point) via a desktop folder, I assume this executes the app locally (i.e no local registry settings via  local install). The concern I would have there is performance, same as with standard SBC? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Rgds&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Paul N &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:49:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/View-and-ThinApp/m-p/827664#M18202</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-10-07T08:49:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>View and ThinApp</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/View-and-ThinApp/m-p/827662#M18200</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Guys&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Im new to VDI and although I have a good understanding of View and ThinApp seperately I need to understand if/how they work together&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Osetnsibly  we would like to be able to have a small number of gold image builds (i.e. officd worker, home worker, 3rd party etc). These builds would contain the OS and the base applications(i.e office, outlook etc)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Using linked clones/NetApp we'd like to deliver desktops based off these clones via View&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We would then  further subdivide the customer groupings by department. i.e.HR, Marketing, Payroll etc and stream apps onto each of these images based on the user profile (i.e attribtute(s) in AD). In this way the Marketing users get their apps streamed onto their VDI desktop, HR theirs etc&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What I need to know is can this be done today and are the tools (View/ThinApp) welll enough intergrated to provide the configuration/management tools to make this possible? Is this good practice, is anyone doing it in production and how does it perform? How many ThinApp servers you need and what size?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ideally we want to use linked clones to minimise the storage footrpint and not have to manage tens or hundreds of builds. What we want is standard builds deleivered off the storage array and specific apps streamed on top. Sounds great but are tools in place to allow us to do all this? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:18:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/View-and-ThinApp/m-p/827662#M18200</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-10-06T12:18:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Can AD and RSA authentication happen on Security Server?</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/Can-AD-and-RSA-authentication-happen-on-Security-Server/m-p/2426065#M61820</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have exactly the same question - can anyone answer?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Reading the View Manager documentation for remote desktop deployment in a DMZ it states&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;"View Security Servers do not contain an LDAP configuration repository and do not &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;access any authentication repositories (Active Directory or RSA Authentication &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Manager). When remote users connect using a View Security Server, they must &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;successfully authenticate before a secure connection is established. This means they &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;cannot attempt to access any virtual desktops until they are successfully authenticated"&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Whoch doesnt make sense? It says they MUST authenticate and then says they cant access any authentication respositories. is it is as simple as saying it can ONLY authenticate against RSA with tokens?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:16:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/Can-AD-and-RSA-authentication-happen-on-Security-Server/m-p/2426065#M61820</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-08-12T16:16:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SR-IOV, virtualisation CNA's and security</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216657#M404</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is this all still under NDA or is there more information about SR-IOV, vmDirectPath etc?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 02 Aug 2009 12:23:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216657#M404</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-08-02T12:23:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>View and ThinApp best practice?</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/ThinApp/View-and-ThinApp-best-practice/m-p/1124402#M2295</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;In terms of best practice how should you combine VDI with app streaming (i.e. View and ThinApp together)?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;i.e. a thin client desktop boots a Windows image from a master clone on a storage platform (i.e. a Linked Clone) then dependent on the user/profile a&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ThinApp server streams applications to that desktop image asrequired, reducing network traffic/launch latency etc&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This is a good start ( &lt;A href="http://edwinfriesen.nl/content/?p=163" target="test_blank"&gt;http://edwinfriesen.nl/content/?p=163&lt;/A&gt; ) but im still not clear on whether you'd want to stream as much as possible or keep core apps (i.e.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;office) on the master image? Which performs better, which gives the user the best experience and which is the more cost effective?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:47:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/ThinApp/View-and-ThinApp-best-practice/m-p/1124402#M2295</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-06-24T14:47:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: HP Flex10: I need to understand!</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027752#M32115</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;BLOCKQUOTE level="1"&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" title="khenault wrote:"&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can treat a Flex-NIC just like any other NIC. You can use Virtual Connect to assign one or more VLANs to each of the four Flex-NICs made availabe by a Flex-10 NIC.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does that answer your question?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ken Henault&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Infrastructure Architect&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hewlett Packard&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes I think so! So what we are saying is we can create an aggregate and map to a FlexNIC. In ESX terms its the same as VLANs tagged from a trunk port which can be seperated out at Port Group level&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If this is right thats cool!&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Still have the question about NIC teaming from within VC?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:38:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027752#M32115</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-06-17T13:38:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: HP Flex10: I need to understand!</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027750#M32113</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;BLOCKQUOTE level="1"&gt;&lt;PRE __jive_macro_name="quote" title="khenault wrote:"&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;Yes, you can provision multiple VLANs to a Flex-NIC. The document in the post above is an excelent resource. In addition you do not need to plan for the ILO connection through the Virtual Connect. This is provided through the Onboard Administrator uplink. You will need an additional NIC in a mezzanine slot and VC-Ethernet module, as the Flex-10 module provide for four Flex-NICs per physical NIC.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ken Henault&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Infrastructure Architect&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hewlett Packard&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Maybe Im not getting it (likely!) but isnt that aggregating to the Physical Flex-10 Nic and not one of the FlexNics?  If one did that I assume that Flex10 Nic is now restricted to only traffic from those aggregated ports (and therfore would preclude say mapping a FlexNics to any other shared uplinks?). &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you cant aggregate to a specific FlexNic I dont really see the point of not just mapping each trunk to a specific FlexNic?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:22:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027750#M32113</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-06-17T13:22:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: HP Flex10: I need to understand!</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027747#M32110</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just wanted to ask a question on some work we have with a customer moving a DL585 ESX cluster in a DMZ onto a c7000 with Flex-10&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I now see that the advantages arent really to do with VLANs or ESX usgae at all, but all to do with cabling and NIC reduction&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The customer we work with has the following NICs on each DL585&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2 x  Outer DMZ (Trunk)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2 x Inner DMZ (Trunk)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2 x Storage&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1 x Backup &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1 x HA / vMotion &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1 x ILO&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1 x Management (Vcenter) &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thats 10 Nics per box, 30 cables, 30 switch ports etc. As per the OP I dont suppose this is atypical &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So we are thinking we can use Flex10 interconnect modules to connect to the external switches.These will be created as shared uplink ports and have VLAN tunnelling. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The queston is do each of these shared links have to be on seperate vNets? And does each FlexNic on the Blade only connect to one vNet? Meaning we will need each blade to have a 1-1 FlexNIC mapping with each of these 10 shared uplinks? There is no way we can pool them or 'trunk' them through one Flex-10 NIC? If so we need additional Flex-10 mezz cards on each Blade to ensure 10 FlexNics. We can amend the bandwidth across the FlexNics which is a plus&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does VC also allow creation/managment of NIC Teaming at the VC level, or would you still have to do this in each OS via  BACS (Broadcom Advanced Control&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Suite)? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If  true (1 vNet per 1 FlexNic) thats seems to be a little bit of a downside as far as I can see? Its glorified pass-through as opposed to true virtualiasation of the shared uplinks across the enclosure? Or have I got this wrong? No doubt at all though that the cabling and port density is massively reduced ( 3 cables per blade as opposed to 10) although it does add a sepertate layer of management )even though its one-and-done until you ever amend the setup)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:15:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027747#M32110</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-06-17T10:15:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>VDI questions</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/VDI-questions/m-p/1197317#M29036</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi there - is it possible to do the following ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Run a client hosted VDI environment where the desktop shall run locally on existing desktop hardware&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Stream the OS to the client on network connection (OS provisioning). Ideally this would only be the delta of any changes not the whole lot each time (i.e. the client stores an OS file somewhere much like say a Sun VirtualBoxVDI file )&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Stream applications on top of that OS via ThinApp or similar&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI level="1" type="ul"&gt;&lt;P&gt;Allow the client to work offline (i.e. for laptops)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does these functions exist now with the current VMWare View product offering? Is this good practice or should we be looking at a better way to do this? What issues would we face (security, network bursts at 9am etc?). We are thinking of using existing desktops as we have an investment there and dont want to come up against the performance issues of remote protocols, hardware support etc. Its ideally to allow us to manage gold builds of desktops (OS's+ applications)  within the DC (NetApp) and stream these down to desktops to reduce the management overhead we have now. Long term when client hypervisors mature enough we could see migrating this setup there - that is allowing the desktop to process but running the config out of the DC&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;All thoughts appreciated&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:37:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Horizon-Desktops-and-Apps/VDI-questions/m-p/1197317#M29036</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-06-16T09:37:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: HP Flex10: I need to understand!</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027724#M32087</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Guys&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; What management interface does VC use?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;One of the reasons we like the Nexus is it would  gives us a standard IOS interface and allows us to apss back control of the networking of these VM's to our network team, rather than having it done by ESX admins (who are usuallyy platform guys with little networking knowledge) &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does for example VC use the same mgt interface as HP switches?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Im concerned thatt even though VC and Flex10 sounds good on paper its something else someone has to learn and manage &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:57:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027724#M32087</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-09T10:57:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SR-IOV, virtualisation CNA's and security</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216655#M402</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;*Between SR-IOV and CNAs you will have to create a new model for security"&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; Yes, that seems to the crux and until this is all out from NDA I guess we dont know &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:29:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216655#M402</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-07T14:29:13Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: HP Flex10: I need to understand!</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027692#M32055</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks Massimo&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; Rather like you then I cant see how if I have an ESX host on the server, the use of VC/Flex10 to provide NIC seperation is really any different to using VMware to use vSwitches on a PNic - its all VLAN seperated at the network layer anyway and youre just moving the management of it somewhere else (which thinking about it is probably a bad thing as its an extra layer to manage) &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I do understand the value prop of VC andFlex 10 - i.e. FlexNIC's are Broadcom NIC's with standard driver support, cable/power reduction, Flex 10GB is 10GB ethernet VC module etc but at the end of the day the traffic is still all flowing over one cable and into one NIC is is still insecure? Even though the Flex Nics are their own broadcom devices with unique identifiers etc its all still done in a software layer  &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:30:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027692#M32055</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-07T10:30:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SR-IOV, virtualisation CNA's and security</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216652#M399</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ed&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Tks for that - yes the other bit im unclear about is how SR-IOV exposes the VM to the network without the need for a vSwitch but still allowing all the good things I can do like vMotion, vSafe etc. What Scott Lowe is calling Gen2 of vmDirectPath. As an architect I just want a VM to be atttched to a virtual NIC, and for SR-IOV to present these virtual NIC's from the hardware to ESX (via Nexus 1000V and an IOS front end that my network guys can administrate and secure)- my network guys dont care what serves up the NIC to the management software - they just want to manage it and treat it like any other interface card (link aggregration etc)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If there really is no 'real' answer in any of this that allows the secure collapsing of network zones onto one cable and one CNA (even through a Nexus VN-Link switch architecture) then it seems we arent really much better off because there is NO WAY my network teams sign off multi VLAN's on a NIC where data spans security zones, seperate customer/department/regulated data etc&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;And it comes down to - is the performance improvement of SR-IOV/getting rid of Fibre -  worth the cost of the CNA's and the new Intel server hardware needed to run it. If im still going to need mutliple CNA's it doesnt seem so right now? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:04:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216652#M399</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-07T10:04:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: HP Flex10: I need to understand!</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027690#M32053</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Massimo&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Im not a HP expert (far from it) but we do use HP Servers as ESX hosts .. and will look at the G6 servers &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is Flex 10 a competing/co-existing technology with SR-IOV? Is it hardware or software based (i.e. do HP run it off a chip or via their own software layer) &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What about VN-Tags? If these become standards (as Cisco / VMware seem to pushing for) where does that leave Flex10 - Is it designed/optimised to run with HP switches upstream or if I have existing Cisco switches and am looking at Nexus/Unified Fabri how does it all play nice? &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:33:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Enterprise-Strategy-Planning/HP-Flex10-I-need-to-understand/m-p/2027690#M32053</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-07T09:33:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>VMSafe learning material</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/VMSafe-learning-material/m-p/2454188#M5280</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Are there any good ppt's or pd'fs on VMsafe ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 07:41:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/VMSafe-learning-material/m-p/2454188#M5280</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-06T07:41:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SR-IOV, virtualisation CNA's and security</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216649#M396</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ed&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Could you summarise? Like to hear your take on what was said&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:36:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216649#M396</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-03T20:36:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: SR-IOV, virtualisation CNA's and security</title>
      <link>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216647#M394</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Massimo&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The thing is, and speaking as an enterprise architect looking after several  good sized accounts and their data centers, we wont look at this either until someone tells us its secure and why. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Bottom line,  nether I nor my security team would consider signing off any solution design fthat didnt explain, in detail, how this was secured. Its a shame because it all sounds great but the its like leaving the main ingredient out of a recipe&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Right now, as it stands, I simply couldnt do a business case for any of this. Maybe im too early and thats fair enough and the tech. needs to mature but were a NetApp/VMWare shop whos moving towards a VDC and looking for best bang for our buck but I cant see how to square the circle in terms of overhead costs vs security&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 14:41:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.vmware.com/t5/Security-and-Compliance/SR-IOV-virtualisation-CNA-s-and-security/m-p/216647#M394</guid>
      <dc:creator>JoeShmoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-04-03T14:41:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

