ddenev Posted June 3, 2009 Author Share Posted June 3, 2009 It would be helpful even if we could only add the ability to set an additional # of IP's for X $ each then have to setup the IP removal manually. Even now you can add a configurable option for IPs and let your customers choose the number of IPs they want. You would only have to add them via HyperVM (which is the approach I use). Best regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy059 Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 Even now you can add a configurable option for IPs and let your customers choose the number of IPs they want. You would only have to add them via HyperVM (which is the approach I use). Best regards That is the best approach. The only issue that we have is that we have multiple servers in different locations and giving the client the power to choose which location would be a huge bonus. I would pay you extra to have this added immediately! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddenev Posted June 4, 2009 Author Share Posted June 4, 2009 That is the best approach. The only issue that we have is that we have multiple servers in different locations and giving the client the power to choose which location would be a huge bonus. I would pay you extra to have this added immediately! Thank you but you will not have to pay extra for this I will think about how to implement this in the next version. The only problem is with my spare time which is even less now. But I will work on the module whenever I have some spare minutes. Best regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stiansj Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 I have some troubble. i have configured everything acording to the manual. But when i place an VPS order hypervm/whmcs dosn't configure the memory option correctly. in hypervm it's not showing that it has any memory. Is this a known problem? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddenev Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share Posted June 9, 2009 in hypervm it's not showing that it has any memory. Could you give more details and some screenshots? Best regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFSG Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I don't think this module can survive any longer now... (the developer of HyperVM is dead) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeP Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Maybe, if you have the time, switch it to a Virtuozzo module. I know that a lot of people are looking for that. I may be able to provide a test server in the coming days. PM me if interested. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XN-Matt Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Although Virtuozzo would be the natural choice as it has a fully featured panel. Proxmox is promising but does not monitor traffic usage currently. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MACscr Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 The problem is that both of those were just for VZ. Currently i cant think of a single panel that does openvz and xen. Almost none do xen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XN-Matt Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Proxmox isn't just VZ (now?), it does KVM also, which is very comparable to Xen. (and from their wiki, you can convert Xen to KVM). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MACscr Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 LOL, kvm is a very immature vm solution and it doesnt do full pvm like xen does. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XN-Matt Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Each to their own. I know a few large providers have switched over from Xen to KVM - and no, they are not small providers who will chance it with, as you claim, an immature solution. Considering there are hardly any other options that do two types of virtualisation OOTB, Proxmox is a good, free alternative. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbmv Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I'm also on the LXLabs forum and posted in one of your threads. If you can give an option in your module to change the port that it communicates with HyperVM on (so we can lock it down and have clients only do things from your module), I would appreciate that a lot. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddenev Posted June 11, 2009 Author Share Posted June 11, 2009 I'm also on the LXLabs forum and posted in one of your threads. If you can give an option in your module to change the port that it communicates with HyperVM on (so we can lock it down and have clients only do things from your module), I would appreciate that a lot. This is already possible. Just edit the hypervm_config.php file. Best regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNodashi Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 LOL, kvm is a very immature vm solution and it doesnt do full pvm like xen does. Actually, KVM does Look here: http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/How_to_assign_devices_with_VT-d_in_KVM http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/FAQ#What_is_Intel_VT_.2F_AMD-V_.2F_hvm.3F Supported OS: http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Guest_Support_Status Only VT & VT-d (aka Full Virtualization / HVM) can support all these options. And, AFAIK, Redhat is looking @ incorportating KVM into their kernel, and remove XEN https://www.redhat.com/promo/qumranet/ http://magazine.redhat.com/2008/07/31/whats-next-in-red-hat-enterprise-linux-part-2/ (do a search for KVM on this page) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddenev Posted June 11, 2009 Author Share Posted June 11, 2009 Guys, please, let's not flood the topic with posts that are not closely related to the original subject . Thank you. Best regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MACscr Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Actually, KVM does Look here: http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/How_to_assign_devices_with_VT-d_in_KVM http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/FAQ#What_is_Intel_VT_.2F_AMD-V_.2F_hvm.3F Supported OS: http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Guest_Support_Status Only VT & VT-d (aka Full Virtualization / HVM) can support all these options. And, AFAIK, Redhat is looking @ incorportating KVM into their kernel, and remove XEN https://www.redhat.com/promo/qumranet/ http://magazine.redhat.com/2008/07/31/whats-next-in-red-hat-enterprise-linux-part-2/ (do a search for KVM on this page) Like i said, PVM, not HVM. PVM is paravirtualization, which is much much faster than full virtualization (HVM), which is what KVM does. KVM only partly does some PVM. Also, Redhat fully supports Xen right now and will do so for at least the next 10 years. Xen is also still widely supported by major players such as AMD, Cisco, Dell, HP, IBM, Intel, Mellanox, Network Appliance, Novell, Red Hat (yes, still RH), SGI, Sun, Unisys, Veritas, Voltaire, and Citrix. I am by far not saying that KVM doesnt have great potential. I am just saying its not a full replacement for Xen at this point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paradoxic Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 When opening up package upgrade options, customers are always generating a $0 invoice or if I enable credits for unused service on package upgrade, they get credit for upgrading. Any idea on why this is happening? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddenev Posted July 9, 2009 Author Share Posted July 9, 2009 When opening up package upgrade options, customers are always generating a $0 invoice or if I enable credits for unused service on package upgrade, they get credit for upgrading. Any idea on why this is happening? Please ask WHMCS related questions in the main WHMCS forum. My module does not relate to the problem you describe. Best regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ES-Aizal Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 ddenev, I'm using your module on whmcs v4. I think I want to upgrade so do I need to know anything prior to upgrade or upgrading whmcs will not effect this module? Thanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddenev Posted August 4, 2009 Author Share Posted August 4, 2009 The module works OK with v4. Best regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy059 Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 ddenev: Any chance we can get an update where you can group different servers together to be used in 1 remote location, and group the other servers to be used in a 2nd remote location and so on? Example: Configurable Option Setup group1|Location 1 group2|Location 2 Then in your module settings we can choose which servers go in group1, and which servers go in group2? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy059 Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Also, if you can expedite this option we'll pay you for it. About how many hours would it take to create this option? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddenev Posted August 12, 2009 Author Share Posted August 12, 2009 ddenev: Any chance we can get an update where you can group different servers together to be used in 1 remote location, and group the other servers to be used in a 2nd remote location and so on? Example: Configurable Option Setup group1|Location 1 group2|Location 2 Then in your module settings we can choose which servers go in group1, and which servers go in group2? Speedy059, could you please elaborate some more. I find it difficult to understand what is exactly that you need. Maybe it is better if we continue this discussion via e-mail. Best regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberneticos Posted September 14, 2009 Share Posted September 14, 2009 Hello Ddenev, I wish I knew this module existed a long time ago ! Are you still developing this module ? Will you continue offering support for it even when HyperVM goes open source ? I'm really interested in using your module, just unsure of its future. Thanks ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.