Looks like it's gone gold today:

"XenServer 8 is now supported for production use, including Windows 11."

• xenserver website (additional info in blog)

Looking forward to XCP-ng 8.3 when ready.

@olivierlambert Thank you - appreciate for the confirmation.

@michael-manley Sounds fantastic! Should allow for GUI additions flexibility as well.

The unusual one happened to occur on a Master (though not all Masters have this reverse ordering).

(Not a major issue in itself - just curious as such discrepancies are not generally found in software.)

Coming across something unusual on two identical hardware 8.3 hosts (latest updates applied) in xsconsole:

Standard (as shown on most hosts):

Reverse order (of selections) just in this category (on one host):

Any ideas on why there is this UI discrepancy/difference (both screenshots taken within seconds of each other)?

@michael-manley Sounds fantastic! Should allow for GUI additions flexibility as well.

@clip *tracking [as edit button is hidden on my Linux client]

@michael-manley Thank you Michael (and patch- and issue-submitters), some clients/users find XCP-ng Center faster for some tasks and like it for familiarity's sake.

Your efforts are much appreciated for making XCP-ng less daunting for a number of people I know - thanks again.

If you are still perchance looking for potential additions, having a (selectable/slide out) right-side of screen (or bottom perhaps) area for showing the running list of tasks (current and history) would make seeing what is going on easier (a quality-of-life issue) rather than switching to it for users (thus making usage and tracing of 'events' faster).

Something like that would be really welcome in XO too !

@olivierlambert Thank you - appreciate for the confirmation.

@olivierlambert Thank you, that was my understanding from reading the documentation - in which case, for multiple host / VM migration scenarios, a physical TPM2 chip is of no benefit - and thus not required?

Per: https://xcp-ng.org/forum/topic/7487/vtpm-support-requirements, Stormi (in June of 2023) has confirmed that a physical TPM hardware module is not required for vTPM. I assume, when buying host hardware for Windows VMs, it is correct to count on this for the future as well.

Thanks for this interesting discussion.

@DustinB In your understanding, does using a built-in chip limit Windows 11 VM (for example) host migrations?

Said another way, is vTPM recommended/required for VMs that will potentially run on multiple hosts?

@Mt_KEGan Confirming that on my end UEFI is what distinguishes my bluescreening VMs from non-bluescreening (BIOS) ones.

Correspondingly, hardware (Intel i7) may not be the deciding factor (at least for my pools).