@wolfmon You have this documentation https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/man/xl.1.html But be careful, most operations of xl are not officially supported in XCP-ng.

@CJ yum update from 8.3 beta to 8.3 will be possible, but I still recommend using the ISO. In a perfect world, yum update would give you exactly the same result, but in reality there are always corner cases where files or packages are left behind (we have no sane way to tell yum/rpm to remove an installed RPM, unless making another RPM obsolete it and thus make it impossible to reinstall later if someone needs it for a good reason).

@mohammadm i think for nfs you should handle that from the kubernetes side. i.e. use an nfs-provisioner or the built-in nfs storageclass

@thepro101 i would install the guest-tools right from the start after base install of the os. create min 3 nodes, install them as you like with guest-tools and then install the first rke2-node. read the docs how to config metallb on rke2. you have to do a small config tweak in the nginx ingress controller config then add the other nodes. to manage rke2 i would use openlens. you can use democtratic-csi but be aware that you completely trust truenas and this opensource-project for your data. i dont think that i would go this route when i am not expirienced with k8s. i would use the nfs-provisioner and when everything works fine and you have a solid csi-enabled backup you can add democratic-csi in the mix. for us, backup and restore was the biggest problem. in theory everything seebs easy with k10 or velero but if you completely shoot your cluster you will have a very hard time. to be honest, after 6 month and some installations we gave up on k8s and migrated our customers and our internal IT to a setup where we use openSuse MicroOS VMs for every docker-compose project. We now have approximately the same amount of VMs which we had as namespace but with the benefit of complete control over resources with very little overhead. And we have the benefit of an optimal backup and restore. K8S bite me quite a bit too often

@Nux rebuilding the dom0 kernel is quite tricky, and I am not sure it is going to help your usecase, if you really want, you may want to look on xcp-ng-rpms and the related linux rpm Regarding nested Hyper-V in Xen, gen2 support was considered in the past, but it never got fully implemented, see https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20191130115737.15752-1-liuwe@microsoft.com/ and https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20190923100931.29670-1-liuwe@microsoft.com/ for related discussion on the Xen mailing list. So as it is now, Xen in Hyper-V gen2 vm is not supported. Only gen1 is supported on a best-effort basis. Gen1 use realistic-behaving emulated devices, thus there is no Hyper-V specific driver that may improve performance.

@jasonnix depends on what PV driver you want to implement. But such place would be the Xen MiniOS repo (tiny PV kernel project that serves as a base for Unikraft among others) : http://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=mini-os.git;a=tree Also give a look at https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Unikernels

@psafont said in Stunnel - Future plans to use something else?: @nikade We've already fixed some issues to start using ocaml 5 regarding the C interfaces. Handling threading in ocaml 5 is still an open problem that the ecosystem has not yet solved (there are many libraries competing now). We still need to create a credible strategy to port xapi to the new model, and don't have any timelines yet Yea porting it is probably not a bad idea, but I guess that involves the biggest tasks as well All tho if you port it there might be opportunities to re-do a lot of things that you have been looking to fix for ages. Crossing my fingers that this is something that you get time to do in the near future, there is a real chance here to take a big part of the esxi market as a lot of ppl are migrating.

@olivierlambert I think so. ceph.ko anyway isn't a core module for XCP-ng, so I don't think there's a high risk in patching it, especially with patches coming from upstream kernel.org. Regarding the initial question, XCP-ng 8.3 will also have a newer kernel-alt. However, I don't recommend it for production, because it is a lot less tested in the context of XCP-ng.

@TheiLLeniumStudios I'm trying to do something similar with Talos, were you able to find a workflow that worked for you since this post?

Hi, It depends on your Windows version (eg > 2019 : go for XenServer drivers). Those PV drivers are pretty stable and works. Alternatively, you can use https://www.xenserver.com/downloads

Our latest update train should provide full vTPM support or close to that (even for migration/snapshot). It's 8.3 beta 2. See https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/68789

Yes, we are considering OpenELA for many reasons. It's backed by big companies with a common goal, so it's probably less risky than other choices (but Alma is also an interesting choice anyway). As usual, it will be loosely based too: it's relatively impossible to "transform" a regular distro to XCP-ng, but it is very helpful to re-use many packages as possible for reducing the burden of maintaining them all

Well, it's not really possible to answer with a short answer. Globally, for the whole platform, we are talking about hard in a way that it takes time.

@ThierryC01 said in XCP-ng Windows PV Drivers 8.2.2: Why is there no video drivers for Windows, I have a Windows 10 Pro VM and the video lags a bit compared to my Linux Desktop VMs despite having 8GO RAM and 16MO (?16 max???) video memory. Because it's rudimentary GFX and has no acceleration at all. It's not made for what you might expect.

Hi, No, nothing urgent to update them. It's mostly minor changes

@reinvtv @jedimarcus Checking Netbox feature requests right now Would this feature still be important to you? I'm also wondering: at the moment, there's a button in the pool's advanced tab to manually run a synchronization for that pool. But with multiple instances, how would that work? Would it synchronize the pool with all the configured instances? What if you only ever wanted to sync pool A with instance A and pool B with instance B?

@Andrew said in RTL8153 Compile: @etomm For the code I compiled it mostly as-it (with one change to support the different XCP kernel header version). I also added three udev rule changes. One is included with the driver code. One change to stop XCP scripts changing USB ethernet names. And one that is to support static USB ethernet names and rename unknown USB ethernet devices to protect the system from conflicts. I now have it working correctly with multiple USB ethernet adapters and stabled names that don't interfere with regular ethernet adapters. It still requires manually adding the MAC addresses and ethernet device names because XCP/Xen does not support USB ethernet devices. @Andrew would you be willing to share the udev rule changes that you made? Also, are you using 8.2 or 8.3 beta? Thank you!

Hi! Link fixed, thanks for the report! This is indeed: https://github.com/xcp-ng/xcp-ng-xapi-storage/tree/add-zfs-vol-driver