vlans and hyper-v

I am running Win2008 Enterprise with SP1.
I am trying to run four hyper-v machines in one physical host. all in
different subnets and VLAN's . the physical server only has 2 NICs , both of
which can handle VLANing
--
ulyses96

Sorry i forgot to post the question ... my question is .. Can i run these
for Virtual machines each in different vlans and subnets with only two
physical NICs? i know one nic should already be for management so that
leaves one .. can this be done?
--
ulyses96


"ulyses_96" wrote:

>
>
> I am running Win2008 Enterprise with SP1.
> I am trying to run four hyper-v machines in one physical host. all in
> different subnets and VLAN's . the physical server only has 2 NICs , both of
> which can handle VLANing
> --
> ulyses96

Why do they need to be different subnets to begin with?

VLANs are just subnets,...and the only common reason for adding subnets is a
high number host on one subnet (keep that below 254 hosts). There is a
security aspect, but that may often be over-rated and over-done. So, in the
end it is broadcasts that subnets defend against by breaking the LAN up into
multiple, managable, broadcast domains.

So the real question is do the subnets (vlans) even need to really exist in
the first place? I'd dare say that much of the time (at least by what I see
in the newsgroups) subnets are created needlessly.

1 - 250 hosts = single subnet
250 - 500 hosts = two subnets
500 - 725 hosts = three subnets

--
Phillip Windell
www.wandtv.com

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------


"ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:2DDE35AE-CC0A-47F0-B6B4-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Sorry i forgot to post the question ... my question is .. Can i run
> these
> for Virtual machines each in different vlans and subnets with only two
> physical NICs? i know one nic should already be for management so that
> leaves one .. can this be done?
> --
> ulyses96
>
>
> "ulyses_96" wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I am running Win2008 Enterprise with SP1.
>> I am trying to run four hyper-v machines in one physical host. all in
>> different subnets and VLAN's . the physical server only has 2 NICs , both
>> of
>> which can handle VLANing
>> --
>> ulyses96

I need each server to be on separate Vlans for security reasons. Our
network is already configured this way and we are just migrating/upgrading
servers. However I still don't know whether i can have 4 virtual servers in
4 different VLANs with only 2 physical NICs on the physical machine.

--
ulyses96


"Phillip Windell" wrote:

> Why do they need to be different subnets to begin with?
>
> VLANs are just subnets,...and the only common reason for adding subnets is a
> high number host on one subnet (keep that below 254 hosts). There is a
> security aspect, but that may often be over-rated and over-done. So, in the
> end it is broadcasts that subnets defend against by breaking the LAN up into
> multiple, managable, broadcast domains.
>
> So the real question is do the subnets (vlans) even need to really exist in
> the first place? I'd dare say that much of the time (at least by what I see
> in the newsgroups) subnets are created needlessly.
>
> 1 - 250 hosts = single subnet
> 250 - 500 hosts = two subnets
> 500 - 725 hosts = three subnets
>
> --
> Phillip Windell
> www.wandtv.com
>
> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
> or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:2DDE35AE-CC0A-47F0-B6B4-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Sorry i forgot to post the question ... my question is .. Can i run
> > these
> > for Virtual machines each in different vlans and subnets with only two
> > physical NICs? i know one nic should already be for management so that
> > leaves one .. can this be done?
> > --
> > ulyses96
> >
> >
> > "ulyses_96" wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> I am running Win2008 Enterprise with SP1.
> >> I am trying to run four hyper-v machines in one physical host. all in
> >> different subnets and VLAN's . the physical server only has 2 NICs , both
> >> of
> >> which can handle VLANing
> >> --
> >> ulyses96
>
>
>

I am pretty sure that the vms would need to be in different virtual
networks, so that would mean one physical NIC for each vm as well as the one
for admin.

I don't use vlans but the above is my opinion based on discussions I
have seen in the Hyper-V Technet forum. As I see it. the vm can handle
external vlan tags but it is not supported inside the virtual network (ie
you cannot have different vlans inside one virtual network).

"ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3A8EC352-A235-4CA8-93DC-(E-Mail Removed)...
> I need each server to be on separate Vlans for security reasons. Our
> network is already configured this way and we are just migrating/upgrading
> servers. However I still don't know whether i can have 4 virtual servers
> in
> 4 different VLANs with only 2 physical NICs on the physical machine.
>
> --
> ulyses96
>
>
> "Phillip Windell" wrote:
>
>> Why do they need to be different subnets to begin with?
>>
>> VLANs are just subnets,...and the only common reason for adding subnets
>> is a
>> high number host on one subnet (keep that below 254 hosts). There is a
>> security aspect, but that may often be over-rated and over-done. So, in
>> the
>> end it is broadcasts that subnets defend against by breaking the LAN up
>> into
>> multiple, managable, broadcast domains.
>>
>> So the real question is do the subnets (vlans) even need to really exist
>> in
>> the first place? I'd dare say that much of the time (at least by what I
>> see
>> in the newsgroups) subnets are created needlessly.
>>
>> 1 - 250 hosts = single subnet
>> 250 - 500 hosts = two subnets
>> 500 - 725 hosts = three subnets
>>
>> --
>> Phillip Windell
>> www.wandtv.com
>>
>> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
>> Microsoft,
>> or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:2DDE35AE-CC0A-47F0-B6B4-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > Sorry i forgot to post the question ... my question is .. Can i run
>> > these
>> > for Virtual machines each in different vlans and subnets with only two
>> > physical NICs? i know one nic should already be for management so that
>> > leaves one .. can this be done?
>> > --
>> > ulyses96
>> >
>> >
>> > "ulyses_96" wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I am running Win2008 Enterprise with SP1.
>> >> I am trying to run four hyper-v machines in one physical host. all in
>> >> different subnets and VLAN's . the physical server only has 2 NICs ,
>> >> both
>> >> of
>> >> which can handle VLANing
>> >> --
>> >> ulyses96
>>
>>
>>

Thank you for your response..
Is there any any way to run 4 Vlans on one physical NIC ?

If not, does this mean that everyone who sets up VMs on one physical box has
them all in one VLAN?? i don't think this is very useful .


--
ulyses96


"Bill Grant" wrote:

> I am pretty sure that the vms would need to be in different virtual
> networks, so that would mean one physical NIC for each vm as well as the one
> for admin.
>
> I don't use vlans but the above is my opinion based on discussions I
> have seen in the Hyper-V Technet forum. As I see it. the vm can handle
> external vlan tags but it is not supported inside the virtual network (ie
> you cannot have different vlans inside one virtual network).
>
> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:3A8EC352-A235-4CA8-93DC-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > I need each server to be on separate Vlans for security reasons. Our
> > network is already configured this way and we are just migrating/upgrading
> > servers. However I still don't know whether i can have 4 virtual servers
> > in
> > 4 different VLANs with only 2 physical NICs on the physical machine.
> >
> > --
> > ulyses96
> >
> >
> > "Phillip Windell" wrote:
> >
> >> Why do they need to be different subnets to begin with?
> >>
> >> VLANs are just subnets,...and the only common reason for adding subnets
> >> is a
> >> high number host on one subnet (keep that below 254 hosts). There is a
> >> security aspect, but that may often be over-rated and over-done. So, in
> >> the
> >> end it is broadcasts that subnets defend against by breaking the LAN up
> >> into
> >> multiple, managable, broadcast domains.
> >>
> >> So the real question is do the subnets (vlans) even need to really exist
> >> in
> >> the first place? I'd dare say that much of the time (at least by what I
> >> see
> >> in the newsgroups) subnets are created needlessly.
> >>
> >> 1 - 250 hosts = single subnet
> >> 250 - 500 hosts = two subnets
> >> 500 - 725 hosts = three subnets
> >>
> >> --
> >> Phillip Windell
> >> www.wandtv.com
> >>
> >> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
> >> Microsoft,
> >> or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
> >> -----------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> news:2DDE35AE-CC0A-47F0-B6B4-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> > Sorry i forgot to post the question ... my question is .. Can i run
> >> > these
> >> > for Virtual machines each in different vlans and subnets with only two
> >> > physical NICs? i know one nic should already be for management so that
> >> > leaves one .. can this be done?
> >> > --
> >> > ulyses96
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "ulyses_96" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I am running Win2008 Enterprise with SP1.
> >> >> I am trying to run four hyper-v machines in one physical host. all in
> >> >> different subnets and VLAN's . the physical server only has 2 NICs ,
> >> >> both
> >> >> of
> >> >> which can handle VLANing
> >> >> --
> >> >> ulyses96
> >>
> >>
> >>
>

Does this help you?

http://blogs.msdn.com/virtual_pc_guy...d-hyper-v.aspx

"ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3BB54932-8749-4327-A813-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Thank you for your response..
> Is there any any way to run 4 Vlans on one physical NIC ?
>
> If not, does this mean that everyone who sets up VMs on one physical box
> has
> them all in one VLAN?? i don't think this is very useful .
>
>
> --
> ulyses96
>
>
> "Bill Grant" wrote:
>
>> I am pretty sure that the vms would need to be in different virtual
>> networks, so that would mean one physical NIC for each vm as well as the
>> one
>> for admin.
>>
>> I don't use vlans but the above is my opinion based on discussions I
>> have seen in the Hyper-V Technet forum. As I see it. the vm can handle
>> external vlan tags but it is not supported inside the virtual network (ie
>> you cannot have different vlans inside one virtual network).
>>
>> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:3A8EC352-A235-4CA8-93DC-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > I need each server to be on separate Vlans for security reasons. Our
>> > network is already configured this way and we are just
>> > migrating/upgrading
>> > servers. However I still don't know whether i can have 4 virtual
>> > servers
>> > in
>> > 4 different VLANs with only 2 physical NICs on the physical machine.
>> >
>> > --
>> > ulyses96
>> >
>> >
>> > "Phillip Windell" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Why do they need to be different subnets to begin with?
>> >>
>> >> VLANs are just subnets,...and the only common reason for adding
>> >> subnets
>> >> is a
>> >> high number host on one subnet (keep that below 254 hosts). There is
>> >> a
>> >> security aspect, but that may often be over-rated and over-done. So,
>> >> in
>> >> the
>> >> end it is broadcasts that subnets defend against by breaking the LAN
>> >> up
>> >> into
>> >> multiple, managable, broadcast domains.
>> >>
>> >> So the real question is do the subnets (vlans) even need to really
>> >> exist
>> >> in
>> >> the first place? I'd dare say that much of the time (at least by what
>> >> I
>> >> see
>> >> in the newsgroups) subnets are created needlessly.
>> >>
>> >> 1 - 250 hosts = single subnet
>> >> 250 - 500 hosts = two subnets
>> >> 500 - 725 hosts = three subnets
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Phillip Windell
>> >> www.wandtv.com
>> >>
>> >> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
>> >> Microsoft,
>> >> or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
>> >> -----------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> >> news:2DDE35AE-CC0A-47F0-B6B4-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> > Sorry i forgot to post the question ... my question is .. Can i
>> >> > run
>> >> > these
>> >> > for Virtual machines each in different vlans and subnets with only
>> >> > two
>> >> > physical NICs? i know one nic should already be for management so
>> >> > that
>> >> > leaves one .. can this be done?
>> >> > --
>> >> > ulyses96
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "ulyses_96" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I am running Win2008 Enterprise with SP1.
>> >> >> I am trying to run four hyper-v machines in one physical host. all
>> >> >> in
>> >> >> different subnets and VLAN's . the physical server only has 2 NICs
>> >> >> ,
>> >> >> both
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> which can handle VLANing
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> ulyses96
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>

From my reading of Ben's post, you should be able to run the vms on one
NIC as you want to do.

Here is how I understand the situation. The virtual network is "vlan
aware" but not "vlan capable".

If you have vlans configured on your LAN and the NIC in the host is
vlan compatible, the vlan tags should be handled correctly by the virtual
switch. So each vm connected to the virtual switch should only see traffic
tagged for its vlan. The vms will not see traffic directed to a different
vlan. They will not see each other (unless there is a router on the physical
LAN to route between vlans).

What doesn't work is trying to set up vlans locally on the virtual
switch. You need a vlan capable device on the physical LAN to do that.

"Bill Grant" <not.available@online> wrote in message
news:#XZMW#(E-Mail Removed)...
> Does this help you?
>
> http://blogs.msdn.com/virtual_pc_guy...d-hyper-v.aspx
>
> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:3BB54932-8749-4327-A813-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Thank you for your response..
>> Is there any any way to run 4 Vlans on one physical NIC ?
>>
>> If not, does this mean that everyone who sets up VMs on one physical box
>> has
>> them all in one VLAN?? i don't think this is very useful .
>>
>>
>> --
>> ulyses96
>>
>>
>> "Bill Grant" wrote:
>>
>>> I am pretty sure that the vms would need to be in different virtual
>>> networks, so that would mean one physical NIC for each vm as well as the
>>> one
>>> for admin.
>>>
>>> I don't use vlans but the above is my opinion based on discussions I
>>> have seen in the Hyper-V Technet forum. As I see it. the vm can handle
>>> external vlan tags but it is not supported inside the virtual network
>>> (ie
>>> you cannot have different vlans inside one virtual network).
>>>
>>> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:3A8EC352-A235-4CA8-93DC-(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> > I need each server to be on separate Vlans for security reasons. Our
>>> > network is already configured this way and we are just
>>> > migrating/upgrading
>>> > servers. However I still don't know whether i can have 4 virtual
>>> > servers
>>> > in
>>> > 4 different VLANs with only 2 physical NICs on the physical machine.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > ulyses96
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > "Phillip Windell" wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Why do they need to be different subnets to begin with?
>>> >>
>>> >> VLANs are just subnets,...and the only common reason for adding
>>> >> subnets
>>> >> is a
>>> >> high number host on one subnet (keep that below 254 hosts). There is
>>> >> a
>>> >> security aspect, but that may often be over-rated and over-done. So,
>>> >> in
>>> >> the
>>> >> end it is broadcasts that subnets defend against by breaking the LAN
>>> >> up
>>> >> into
>>> >> multiple, managable, broadcast domains.
>>> >>
>>> >> So the real question is do the subnets (vlans) even need to really
>>> >> exist
>>> >> in
>>> >> the first place? I'd dare say that much of the time (at least by
>>> >> what I
>>> >> see
>>> >> in the newsgroups) subnets are created needlessly.
>>> >>
>>> >> 1 - 250 hosts = single subnet
>>> >> 250 - 500 hosts = two subnets
>>> >> 500 - 725 hosts = three subnets
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Phillip Windell
>>> >> www.wandtv.com
>>> >>
>>> >> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
>>> >> Microsoft,
>>> >> or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
>>> >> -----------------------------------------------------
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> "ulyses_96" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> >> news:2DDE35AE-CC0A-47F0-B6B4-(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> >> > Sorry i forgot to post the question ... my question is .. Can i
>>> >> > run
>>> >> > these
>>> >> > for Virtual machines each in different vlans and subnets with only
>>> >> > two
>>> >> > physical NICs? i know one nic should already be for management so
>>> >> > that
>>> >> > leaves one .. can this be done?
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > ulyses96
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > "ulyses_96" wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I am running Win2008 Enterprise with SP1.
>>> >> >> I am trying to run four hyper-v machines in one physical host. all
>>> >> >> in
>>> >> >> different subnets and VLAN's . the physical server only has 2 NICs
>>> >> >> ,
>>> >> >> both
>>> >> >> of
>>> >> >> which can handle VLANing
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> ulyses96
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>