Why is Hyper-V so painful?

FLECOM

Modder(ator) & [H]ardest Folder Evar
Staff member
Joined
Jun 27, 2001
Messages
15,805
Did I miss something?

VMWare
1) setup server
2) install client
3) connect to server
4) profit

XEN
1) setup server
2) install client
3) connect to server
4) profit

Hyper-V
1) setup server
2) install client
3) oh wait, windows 7 client does not work with hyperv 2012 core
4) install windows 8 (while resisting urge to kill self)
5) install hyper-v client
6) connect to server
7) does not work
8) read a million tech net articles and do shit like the following

> To enable the Hyper-V manager to connect to your server, you need to perform the following 2 actions: (Assuming you have already installed the feature)

1:
! Client: Locate the C:\Windows\System32\Drivers\etc\hosts file.
! right-click --> properties --> security
! click --> edit --> add --> YOURUSERNAME or Administrator --> OK
! then select this new user, and tick the "modify"-box under the "allow"-section.
! apply the change, and close.
! doubleclick the file, and open with notepad
! add the ip-address and name of your server (no // or other crap needed)
! Save the file
# I recommend putting a shortcut to this file on the desktop.
# If you change the ip-address of your server (e.g. move the server from staging to a live environment)
# you might forget to do so in the hosts file.
# Hyper-V manager, MMC, RSAT, and Server-manager all rely on the hosts-file to resolve the name.
# some of these might connect to their respective service on an i.p.-level, but some don't.
# This is the main reason you need to modify this file.

! USE AN ELEVATED CMD/POWERSHELL PROMPT TO CONTINUE !
# the next config needs to be done on windows 8.
# It seems that it's already preconfigured under server 2012

2:
! Client: dcomcnfg
! open component services --> computers
! right-click -> my computer -> properties
! select "COM SECURITY" tab
! under "ACCESS PERMISSIONS" select "edit limits"
! select "ANONYMOUS LOGON", and tick "remote access" under ALLOW
# Without this adjustment, you can't connect to your Hyper-V server
# with the Hyper-V manager if you're not in a domain.

> And if you haven't done so already... make sure you have enabled remote management number 4 on the Hyper-V server console.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


> Next, is to get the MMC firewall snap-in working.
The reason for this, is to have a GUI available to configure it.
If you're happy without it, you may skip this and use a shell instead to do so.

? server: netsh advfirewall show currentprofile
# shows the current profile (public/domain/private) and its settings
# depending on your needs, you should set the right profile to fit your needs.
# You can easily do this when the MMC snap-in is done. (after you've followed these steps)

! server: netsh advfirewall set currentprofile settings remotemanagement enable
# enables remote management of the firewall on an application level
# (In other words: allows the firewall to be remotely managed)

! server: netsh advfirewall firewall set rule group="Windows Firewall Remote Management" new enable=yes
# allows remote management of the firewall, through the required firewall ports with TCP protocol.
# 4 rules will be updated to allow access: public & Domain, dynamic and endpoint-mapper.
# You can disable/add/change the rule from the MMC snap-in after finishing this guide.
# e.g. set the firewall through the MMC-GUI to only allow specific ip-addresses etc.

? server: netsh advfirewall firewall show rule all
# Shows a list of available rules, and their current state.
# when run from cmd, the list exceeds the maximum length for review.
# (from cmd,type:) start powershell, and run the command from there.

! Client: cmdkey /add:YOURSERVERNAME /user:USERNAMEONTHESERVER /pass:THEPASSWORDOFTHATUSER
# I recommend you to use a username with enough privileges for management
# All capital letters need to be replaced with your input
# CMD answers "credential added successfully" when you're done

! Client: locate MMC, and run it as an admin.
# In windows 8/2012, go to search and type MMC. Right-click the icon,
# and choose run as admin on the bar below.

! Client: application MMC: select "file" --> Add/remove snap-in
! --> (left pane) scroll down to "windows firewall" --> select and click "add"
! select "another computer"
! type the name of the server you want to manage (NO workgroup/ or //, just same name as you typed for cmdkey)

* Part 2 is done.
# Have a look by doubleclicking the firewall icon in the left pane.
# It looks and works the same as the GUI version that you are familiar with.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

! Next is the Server Manager.
# Follow the steps listed to get your server listed and manageable in the server manager.


! Client: Open the created Firewall snap-in for your server.
! Find the 3 "Remote Event Log Management" entries in the list of INBOUND rules, and enable them.



! Open powershell --> in cmd windows, type: start powershell
! run the following line in powershell
! Client: in C:\Windows\system32> set-item WSMAN:\localhost\client\trustedhosts -value YOURSERVERNAME -concatenate

# WinRM Security Configuration.
# This command modifies the TrustedHosts list for the WinRM client. The computers in the TrustedHosts list might not be
# authenticated. The client might send credential information to these computers. Are you sure that you want to modify
# this list?
# [Y] Yes [N] No Suspend [?] Help (default is "Y"): y
#
# I recommend to choose yes; unless you like to pull some more hairs...

! server: winrm qc
# WinRM service is already running on this machine.
# WinRM is not set up to allow remote access to this machine for management.
# The following changes must be made:
# Configure LocalAccountTokenFilterPolicy to grant administrative rights remotely
# to local users.
# Make the changes? y / n
! select yes


! Client: open the server 2012 server manager
! click manage -> add server
! select the DNS tab, and type the name of your server

are you fucking kidding me?

what the hell was Microsoft thinking?
 
so how did you do it?

I did an install of the hyper-v 2012 server core edition or whatever, clean windows 8 install

disabled firewalls on both machines, enabled remote management on the server

try to connect to the hyperv server and all I get in the hyperv manager is

"RPC server unavailable. Unable to establish communication between 'server' and 'client'."

and if you google that I'm definitely not the only one
 
Yeah. I love how you install Hyper-V 2012 Core and it enables the firewall so you can't even manage it right away.... Microsoft can't get out of their own way.
 
I refuse to use Hyper-V for the reasons that the OP stated.
 
Because Microsoft. If its not complicated enough, you must complicate more, in the name of security via broken functionality and giving work to Microsoft Partners with inside information to fix what should work out of the box.
 
I refuse to use Hyper-V for the reasons that the OP stated.

as much as I want to go the nuclear option and blow away hyper-v and go back to VMware I am really trying to get comfortable in all 3 systems so this is just part of the learning experience I guess :(
 
I totally agree on this point. Why I cannot have super simple Hyper-V management setup in Windows is a bit beyond me. The Windows 8 desktop HV is great though.
 
Just install full server 2012 with gui and add the hyper-v role, 10x easier than core install.
Also if you use VMM that makes it a lot easier to manage.
 
Just install full server 2012 with gui and add the hyper-v role, 10x easier than core install.
Also if you use VMM that makes it a lot easier to manage.

because I don't want to spend the money on a server 2012 license for each box


thanks I will explore some of these options
 
I agree. You need a domain or Server with Hyper-V role enabled to escape all of the permissions/firewall issues.
 
I just RDP into my Hyper-V box and admin from there. No domain or anything.
 
My steps:

-Install Server 2012 on Server, join to domain, install Hyper-V role.
-Install Hyper-V client role on my laptop (Win8), connect, start building VMs.

I have also managed it via RDP, then it is just like installing a Windows server, install the Hyper-V role, start building VMs.

Was super simple, and way easier than XenServer or VMWare were to get setup as the disk config was way simpler since it was windows that I am familiar with. (and for reference, I have run VMWare, XenServer, and Hyper-V)

That BS about modifying the host file sounds like a huge hack job.
 
My steps:

-Install Server 2012 on Server, join to domain, install Hyper-V role.
-Install Hyper-V client role on my laptop (Win8), connect, start building VMs.

I have also managed it via RDP, then it is just like installing a Windows server, install the Hyper-V role, start building VMs.

Was super simple, and way easier than XenServer or VMWare were to get setup as the disk config was way simpler since it was windows that I am familiar with.

Same here. I've got MDT running in my lab so deployment was:

1. PXE boot to deployment server
2. Select Windows 2012 as OS
3. Give the server a name
4. Select Hyper-V role and Hyper-V management tools

30 minutes later I had a fully patched Hyper-V server joined to the domain and ready to be configured.
 
Some of you obviously haven't installed Hyper-v Server. It is different than installing the Hyper-v role, and has only a cmd window after install. Advantage is free and no limit on memory and no socket limitation.
 
When i tried hyper-v at one of my sites I had issues with it slowing the server down, and the VM's were unusable. I had to read for a few days and tried every fix i could find, still did not fix it. The server was a new R720XD with 64gb ram, 2 processors, and 3 x 10k RPM 900gb drives. It's a shame because i really wanted to start using hyper-v as we already own the data-center license for server 2008 :(
 
And some of you who are having problems obviously haven't tried setting up HV in a domain settings. You just setup GPO to enable remote admin and add the necessary firewall rules, and the steps become:

Install HV Server
Join to domain
Administer from domain joined win7 or win8 machine (win7 works mostly, you just can't access certain features like dynamic RAM and others new to HV 3.0)
 
that requires a DC, which is another license, more money
 
MS terming of Free Hypervisor has some fine print.

1. You can't get advanced features with out a Domain.
 
that requires a DC, which is another license, more money
Except it's fair to say that the vast majority of companies already have DCs so for a business it's a non-issue. For home use there's always TechNet and you get a lot more than just a DC for that.
 
Except it's fair to say that the vast majority of companies already have DCs so for a business it's a non-issue. For home use there's always TechNet and you get a lot more than just a DC for that.

Actually thats not fair to say. I have clients that don't have a traditional window AD. They have LDAP but no AD. Heck I got Novell still in production, Solaris and SCO.
Any way its not like HyperV supports those any way.

So free is not free at all. I hate when companies say shit like that, its misleading.
 
Really the only Hypervisor I like free is Xenserver.

VMWare free is limiting as heck and Hyper-V is a PITA to manage if you dont have a domain.

Now, my question would be if you are going Hyper-V...how would you not have a domain and not have licenses for a full Hyper-V host. If you are running any Windows Servers, with the 2012 licensing and VM rights, it makes it very affordable vs. having to put out coin for the Hypervisor like VMWare + Windows licenses.

If you are not a windows shop, you likely should not be running Hyper-V in the first place.

Home/Lab? Technet.
 
I thought the free xenserver was pretty gimped too (not that much better than free vsphere).
 
I thought the free xenserver was pretty gimped too (not that much better than free vsphere).

They do take a lot out, but they dont have RAM restrictions and still allow clustering, shared storage, migrations, etc.
 
Really the only Hypervisor I like free is Xenserver.

VMWare free is limiting as heck and Hyper-V is a PITA to manage if you dont have a domain.

Now, my question would be if you are going Hyper-V...how would you not have a domain and not have licenses for a full Hyper-V host. If you are running any Windows Servers, with the 2012 licensing and VM rights, it makes it very affordable vs. having to put out coin for the Hypervisor like VMWare + Windows licenses.

If you are not a windows shop, you likely should not be running Hyper-V in the first place.

Home/Lab? Technet.

well, a couple things, first hyperv supports all the intel ICH raid controllers in these cloud servers I have, which is nice...

second, I was using Xen and the performance hit compared to VMware is pretty massive... so I wanted to try out Hyper-V

these are all Linux VMs for the most part
 
So far I am not liking HyperV 2012. I still can't believe you can't have Windows Primary disk drive scsi it has to be ATA. Still same shit that was bad about 2008r2 is still there. You have to have AD.. Which is kinda dumb if your building a network from scratch and don't have an ad, CORE install is still just not usable at this stage. Additional configurations you need to perform if you decide that your VHD are going to be else where. Even tho MS made great strides in Mangment inside the server they are just hopeless when it comes to quick deployments compared to VMWare. I still feel VMWare is the superior product.
 
You don't NEED AD. My 2012 server is not on any domain. It should be on one but its not and works fine. This is home use though so not the "proper" way of doing it.
 
I still can't believe you can't have Windows Primary disk drive scsi it has to be ATA. Still same shit that was bad about 2008r2 is still there.
This matters in a virtualized environment even remotely why?!?
 
This matters in a virtualized environment even remotely why?!?

Matters if you're moving a VMware VM to Hyper-V. Can't hot add or remove disks on ATA controllers either.

My biggest pet peeve right now is that you can't PXE boot a Hyper-V VM with the standard virtual network adapter, you have to use legacy. Really sucks in an environment where you deploy VMs via MDT or SCCM.
 
You can in vsphere, and a native hypervisor is much better then a hosted hypervisor since it is a lot more simple to setup and use. I'm guessing one of the only reasons that a lot more hardware can work is because hyper-v operates on an OS and you can just install drivers for hardware
 
You can in vsphere, and a native hypervisor is much better then a hosted hypervisor since it is a lot more simple to setup and use. I'm guessing one of the only reasons that a lot more hardware can work is because hyper-v operates on an OS and you can just install drivers for hardware

Hyper V is a level 1 Hypervisor just like vsphere.Problem with some hypervisors is they need to go through a Kernel thus limiting certain functionality and performance unlinke Vsphere.
 
Hyper-v is a hosted hypervisor since it requires an OS to be installed under it before it gets installed itself, whereas vsphere is a native hypervisor that runs straight on the hardware and sits in the ram once the machine is booted. You are referring to workstation, not vsphere, which is how all type 2 hypervisors work: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hyperviseur.png. I'm not sure why but people always try to say that vsphere and workstation are the same since they are both from vmware.
 
Hyper-v is a hosted hypervisor since it requires an OS to be installed under it before it gets installed itself, whereas vsphere is a native hypervisor that runs straight on the hardware and sits in the ram once the machine is booted. You are referring to workstation, not vsphere, which is how all type 2 hypervisors work: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hyperviseur.png. I'm not sure why but people always try to say that vsphere and workstation are the same since they are both from vmware.

Hyper-v is a level a level 1 hypervisor (its considered that by MS) so is vsphere.
The difference between that and vmware is that vmware re-wrote its virtualization in ESXi as it use to depend on the Kernel in ESX.

Most hypervisors still run in an OS(even vmware) but they are very cleaverly coded to get better utilization of hardware(vmware being the best at ram utilization), unfortunately last time I checked most hypervisors have a ram access issues and have to run through the OS kernel.

If you want to get in semantics technically vsphere is really an OS as well.

Standalone products like VirtualBox or Parrellels, VM Workstation, Fusion, VMServer 2005 etc is a level 2. These depend on emulation.
 
Hyper-v is a hosted hypervisor since it requires an OS to be installed under it before it gets installed itself, whereas vsphere is a native hypervisor that runs straight on the hardware and sits in the ram once the machine is booted. You are referring to workstation, not vsphere, which is how all type 2 hypervisors work: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hyperviseur.png. I'm not sure why but people always try to say that vsphere and workstation are the same since they are both from vmware.

Hyper-V is just as much running on an "OS" as vsphere is.
 
The hyper-v role has to be installed after you install windows server though, and the reason its considered a type 1 hypervisor is because Microsoft set the boot process to load some hyper-v functionality before the management software loads. Esxi installs and then you start creating virtual machines, but the point the OP is trying to make is that with hyper-v, you install windows server, install the hyper-v role, and then have to go through and configure the server in order to get the ability to get the server ready to use as a virtual host.
 
The hyper-v role has to be installed after you install windows server though, and the reason its considered a type 1 hypervisor is because Microsoft set the boot process to load some hyper-v functionality before the management software loads. Esxi installs and then you start creating virtual machines, but the point the OP is trying to make is that with hyper-v, you install windows server, install the hyper-v role, and then have to go through and configure the server in order to get the ability to get the server ready to use as a virtual host.

It doesnt matter how it is installed, it is how it runs, and it still runs as a Type 1. I have also played with performance, and Hyper-V is very comparable if not better in some metrics than the other type 1 hypervisors.

Hyper-V role, while installed after the OS load, is not simply an application that is installed on to windows.
 
Back
Top