vpc 2007 vs vs2005

For running 2 or 3 vms (3x 1GB RAM) on Vista ultimate 64 host with core 2
quad 2.6 GHz and 8 GB Ram , is vac 2007 better or vs 2005?
with vpc 2007, I get Mac address conflict on VMs whenever I wake the host
from hibernation

On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 00:45:46 -0600, "GS"
<> wrote:

>For running 2 or 3 vms (3x 1GB RAM) on Vista ultimate 64 host with core 2
>quad 2.6 GHz and 8 GB Ram , is vac 2007 better or vs 2005?
>with vpc 2007, I get Mac address conflict on VMs whenever I wake the host
>from hibernation
>
VPC2007 is intended for workstation class operating systems in the
guests. THis means that it gives you a window within which the guest
runs so you can interact with it directly. But it also means that you
have to be logged on to the host to run the virtual machines.

VS2005 on the other hand is intended for server class operating
systems in the guests. This means that VS2005 can start the gustes up
even with noone logged on to the host. It runs as a service.
It does not have a native window where the guest runs, instead you get
a web based interface to the guest machines or you must use RDP.

The networking issues are totally irrelevant to this question. You
simply do not have your DHCP server set up correctly.

--

Bo Berglund (Sweden)

It's not a good idea to hibernate with VM's active in any VM product.
The VM's aren't aware of it so you have clock, and yes, networking
problems. (especially if they're domain joined.)

--
Bob Comer


On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 00:45:46 -0600, "GS"
<> wrote:

>For running 2 or 3 vms (3x 1GB RAM) on Vista ultimate 64 host with core 2
>quad 2.6 GHz and 8 GB Ram , is vac 2007 better or vs 2005?
>with vpc 2007, I get Mac address conflict on VMs whenever I wake the host
>from hibernation
>

thank you all.
The Vms are stand alone VMs not domain based. Furthermore they are have
static IP. Also the vista host is a stand alone PC not in domain

So are you saying I should use dhcp server like the that of the router to
assign Ip instead of fixed unique ip for each VM?

"Robert Comer" <bobcomer-removeme-@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:...
> It's not a good idea to hibernate with VM's active in any VM product.
> The VM's aren't aware of it so you have clock, and yes, networking
> problems. (especially if they're domain joined.)
>
> --
> Bob Comer
>
>
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 00:45:46 -0600, "GS"
> <> wrote:
>
> >For running 2 or 3 vms (3x 1GB RAM) on Vista ultimate 64 host with core
2
> >quad 2.6 GHz and 8 GB Ram , is vac 2007 better or vs 2005?
> >with vpc 2007, I get Mac address conflict on VMs whenever I wake the host
> >from hibernation
> >

>So are you saying I should use dhcp server like the that of the router to
>assign Ip instead of fixed unique ip for each VM?

I don't think that's going to help, it's something in how the VM's are
getting restarted, maybe the NIC isn't ready to begin with, or
something equally arcane. It may be worth a try though as it'll
change the order in how things start up.

It'd really be best to just save state the VM's before you hibernate,
and start them after you restart your PC.

--
Bob Comer


On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:11:05 -0600, "GS"
<> wrote:

>thank you all.
>The Vms are stand alone VMs not domain based. Furthermore they are have
>static IP. Also the vista host is a stand alone PC not in domain
>
>So are you saying I should use dhcp server like the that of the router to
>assign Ip instead of fixed unique ip for each VM?
>
>"Robert Comer" <bobcomer-removeme-@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> It's not a good idea to hibernate with VM's active in any VM product.
>> The VM's aren't aware of it so you have clock, and yes, networking
>> problems. (especially if they're domain joined.)
>>
>> --
>> Bob Comer
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 00:45:46 -0600, "GS"
>> <> wrote:
>>
>> >For running 2 or 3 vms (3x 1GB RAM) on Vista ultimate 64 host with core
>2
>> >quad 2.6 GHz and 8 GB Ram , is vac 2007 better or vs 2005?
>> >with vpc 2007, I get Mac address conflict on VMs whenever I wake the host
>> >from hibernation
>> >
>

Robert Comer wrote:
> It'd really be best to just save state the VM's before you hibernate,
> and start them after you restart your PC.

I really think there should be an option in VPC for this to happen automatically.

--
David Wilkinson
Visual C++ MVP

>I really think there should be an option in VPC for this to happen automatically.

I agree, but it'd be a fundamental change for the host OS. (it
doesn't tell apps it's hibernating now, so there's no way for VPC to
know.)

--
Bob Comer


On Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:29:07 -0400, David Wilkinson
<no-> wrote:

>Robert Comer wrote:
>> It'd really be best to just save state the VM's before you hibernate,
>> and start them after you restart your PC.
>
>I really think there should be an option in VPC for this to happen automatically.

Robert Comer wrote:
>> I really think there should be an option in VPC for this to happen automatically.
>
> I agree, but it'd be a fundamental change for the host OS. (it
> doesn't tell apps it's hibernating now, so there's no way for VPC to
> know.)
>

Robert:

The WM_POWERBROADCAST message is sent to all open applications when the host is
going into hibernation.

But ISTR that on Vista and above applications have limited ability to delay the
hibernation.

--
David Wilkinson
Visual C++ MVP

Interesting, I didn't know that.

You sure it sends a broadcast on hibernate? Looking at the docs it
looks more like it's sleep type events.

--
Bob Comer


On Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:28:19 -0400, David Wilkinson
<no-> wrote:

>Robert Comer wrote:
>>> I really think there should be an option in VPC for this to happen automatically.
>>
>> I agree, but it'd be a fundamental change for the host OS. (it
>> doesn't tell apps it's hibernating now, so there's no way for VPC to
>> know.)
>>
>
>Robert:
>
>The WM_POWERBROADCAST message is sent to all open applications when the host is
>going into hibernation.
>
>But ISTR that on Vista and above applications have limited ability to delay the
>hibernation.

On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:11:05 -0600, "GS"
<> wrote:

>thank you all.
>The Vms are stand alone VMs not domain based. Furthermore they are have
>static IP. Also the vista host is a stand alone PC not in domain
>
>So are you saying I should use dhcp server like the that of the router to
>assign Ip instead of fixed unique ip for each VM?
>

If you leave your VMs running when you hibernate, you'll get that
duplicate MAC conflict.
Its a known issue, it happens to be when I hibernate before I save
state my VMs.

IIRC, I've reported it to higher powers and there's no fix for it yet,
other than save your VMs before hibernating.

--
Cheers,
Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
http://vpc.essjae.com/