[clug] Why virtual x86 machines?
kim.holburn at gmail.com
Sun Aug 23 07:40:17 UTC 2020
Thanks, I'll have a look. Doesn't really solve the problem of noise and
power usage for home machines.
On 2020/08/23 9:27 am, David C wrote:
> On that, have a look at firecracker - KVM with a truly minimal and
> security focussed VM interface.
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2020, 10:41 am Kim Holburn via linux,
> <linux at lists.samba.org <mailto:linux at lists.samba.org>> wrote:
> On 2020/08/21 11:45 pm, Hugh Fisher via linux wrote:
> > If a machine is idling away happily, so what? Why do we think it
> > worthwhile or necessary to reach a level of utilization?
> > I assume it's not hardcore Protestant theology, "the Devil finds work
> > for idle CPUs".
> > For environmental / monetary reasons, if you have expensive CPUs it is
> > worthwhile to have the minimum number of systems running with as much
> > utilization as required. But it seems to me that this is an industry
> > choice, not the only way to do things.
> For a long time I have used almost the opposite system to
> virtualisation, although virtualisation is growing on me.
> I have been working on home systems, especially home network security.
> To call home network security pretty poor is a major understatement. I
> like to have small servers to create network infrastructure. DNS,
> syslog, LDAP, things like that. I like them physically separate, on the
> basis that there are often ways to penetrate the virtual barriers and
> small so they don't end up loaded with too many applications. Also for
> homes, I don't like large noisy power hungry servers. RaspberryPis are
> perfect for this type of use.
> Kim Holburn
> IT Network & Security Consultant
> T: +61 2 61402408 M: +61 404072753
> mailto:kim at holburn.net <mailto:kim at holburn.net> aim://kimholburn
> skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request
> linux mailing list
> linux at lists.samba.org <mailto:linux at lists.samba.org>
More information about the linux