Subscribe via Email

Subscribe via RSS/JSON


Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
© Rakhesh Sasidharan


Migrating VMkernel port from Standard to Distributed Switch fails

I am putting a link to the official VMware documentation on this as I Googled it just to confirm to myself I am not doing anything wrong! What I need to do is migrate the physical NICs and Management/ VM Network VMkernel NIC from a standard switch to a distributed switch. Process is simple and straight-forward, and one that I have done numerous times; yet it fails for me now!

Here’s a copy paste from the documentation:

  1. Navigate to Home > Inventory > Networking.
  2. Right-click the dVswitch.
  3. If the host is already added to the dVswitch, click Manage Hosts, else Click Add Host.
  4. Select the host(s), click Next.
  5. Select the physical adapters ( vmnic) to use for the vmkernel, click Next.
  6. Select the Virtual adapter ( vmk) to migrate and click Destination port group field. For each adapter, select the correct port group from dropdown, Click Next.
  7. Click Next to omit virtual machine networking migration.
  8. Click Finish after reviewing the new vmkernel and Uplink assignment.
  9. The wizard and the job completes moving both the vmk interface and the vmnic to the dVswitch.

Basically add physical NICs to the distributed switch & migrate vmk NICs as part of the process. For good measure I usually migrate only one physical NIC from the standard switch to the distributed switch, and then separately migrate the vmk NICs. 

Here’s what happens when I am doing the above now. (Note: now. I never had an issue with this earlier. Am guessing it must be some bug in a newer 5.5 update, or something’s wrong in the underlying network at my firm. I don’t think it’s the networking coz I got my network admins to take a look, and I tested that all NICs on the host have connectivity to the outside world (did this by making each NIC the active one and disabling the others)). 

First it’s stuck in progress:

And then vCenter cannot see the host any more:

Oddly I can still ping the host on the vmk NIC IP address. However I can’t SSH into it, so the Management bits are what seem to be down. The host has connectivity to the outside world because it passes the Management network tests from DCUI (which I can connect to via iLO). I restarted the Management agents too, but nope – cannot SSH or get vCenter to see the host. Something in the migration step breaks things. Only solution is to reboot and then vCenter can see the host.

Here’s what I did to workaround anyways. 

First I moved one physical NIC to the distributed switch.

Then I created a new management portgroup and VMkernel NIC on that for management traffic. Assigned it a temporary IP.

Next I opened a console to the host. Here’s the current config on the host:

The interface vmk0 (or its IPv4 address rather) is what I wanted to migrate. The interface vmk4 is what I created temporarily. 

I now removed the IPv4 address of the existing vmk NIC and assigned that to the new one. Also, confirmed the changes just to be sure. As soon as I did so vCenter picked up the changes. I then tried to move the remaining physical NIC over to the distributed switch, but that failed. Gave an error that the existing connection was forcibly closed by the host. So I rebooted the host. Post-reboot I found that the host now thought it had no IP, even though it was responding to the old IP via the new vmk. So this approach was a no-go (but still leaving it here as a reminder to myself that this does not work)

I now migrated vmk0 from the standard switch to the distributed switch. As before, this will fail – vCenter will lose connectivity to the ESX host. But that’s why I have a console open. As expected the output of esxcli network ip interface list shows me that vmk0 hasn’t moved to the distributed switch:

So now I go ahead and remove the IPv4 address of vmk0 and assign that to vmk4 (the new one). Also confirmed the changes. 

Next I rebooted the host, and via the CLI I removed vmk0 (for some reason the GUI showed both vmk0 and vmk4 with the same IP I assigned above). 

Reboot again!

Post-reboot I can go back to the GUI and move the remaining physical NIC over to the distributed switch. :) Yay!

[Aside] How to quickly get ESXi logs from a web browser (without SSH, vSphere client, etc)

This post made my work easy yesterday –

tl;dr version:  go to https://IP_of_Your_ESXi/host

[Aside] Memory Resource Management in ESXi

Came across this PDF from VMware while reading on memory management. It’s dated, but a good read. Below are some notes I took while reading it. Wanted to link to the PDF and also put these somewhere; hence this post.

Some terminology:

  • Host physical memory <–[mapped to]– Guest physical memory (continuous virtual address space presented by Hypervisor to Guest OS) <–[mapped to]– Guest virtual memory (continuous virtual address space presented by Guest OS to its applications).
    • Guest virtual -> Guest physical mapping is in Guest OS page tables
    • Guest physical -> Host physical mapping is in pmap data structure
      • There’s also a shadow page table that the Hypervisor maintains for Guest virtual -> Guest physical
      • A VM does Guest virtual -> Guest physical mapping via hardware Translation Lookup Buffers (TLBs). The hypervisor intercepts calls to these; and uses these to keep its shadow page tables up to date.
  • Guest physical memory -> Guest swap device (disk) == Guest level paging.
  • Guest physical memory -> Host swap device (disk) == Hypervisor swapping.

Some interesting bits on the process:

  • Applications use OS provided interfaces to allocate & de-allocate memory.
  • OSes have different implementations on how memory is classified as free or allocated. For example: two lists.
  • A VM has no pre-allocated physical memory.
  • Hypervisor maintains its own data structures for free and allocated memory for a VM.
  • Allocating memory for a VM is easy. When the VM Guest OS makes a request to a certain location, it will generate a page fault. The hypervisor can capture that and allocate memory.
  • De-allocation is tricky because there’s no way for the hypervisor to know the memory is not in use. These lists are internal to the OS. So there’s no straight-forward way to take back memory from a VM.
  • The host physical memory assigned to a VM doesn’t keep growing indefinitely though as the guest OS will free and allocate within the range assigned to it, so it will stick within what it has. And side by side the hypervisor tries to take back memory anyways.
    • Only when the VM tries to access memory that is not actually mapped to host physical memory does a page fault happen. The hypervisor will intercept that and allocate memory.
  • For de-allocation, the hypervisor adds the VM assigned memory to a free list. Actual data in the physical memory may not be modified. Only when that physical memory is subsequently allocated to some other VM does it get zeroed out.
  • Ballooning is one way of reclaiming memory from the VM. This is a driver loaded in the Guest OS.
    • Hypervisor tells ballooning driver how much memory it needs back.
    • Driver will pin those memory pages using Guest OS APIs (so the Guest OS thinks those pages are in use and should not assign to anyone else).
    • Driver will inform Hypervisor it has done this. And Hypervisor will remove the physical backing of those pages from physical memory and assign it to other VMs.
    • Basically the balloon driver inflates the VM’s memory usage, giving it the impression a lot of memory is in use. Hence the term “balloon”.
  • Another way is Hypervisor swapping. In this the Hypervisor swaps to physical disk some of the physical memory it has assigned to the VM. So what the VM thinks is physical memory is actually on disk. This is basically swapping – just that it’s done by Hypervisor, instead of Guest OS.
    • This is not at all preferred coz it’s obviously going to affect VM performance.
    • Moreover, the Guest OS too could swap the same memory pages to its disk if it is under memory pressure. Hence double paging.
  • Ballooning is slow. Hypervisor swapping is fast. Ballooning is preferred though; Hypervisor swapping is only used when under lots of pressure.
  • Host (Hypervisor) has 4 memory states (view this via esxtop, press m).
    • High == All Good
    • Soft == Start ballooning. (Starts before the soft state is actually reached).
    • Hard == Hypervisor swapping too.
    • Low == Hypervisor swapping + block VMs that use more memory than their target allocations.


TIL: vCenter inherited permissions are not cumulative

Say you are part of two groups. Group A has full rights on the vCenter. Group B has limited rights on a cluster.

You would imagine that since you are a member of Group A and that has full rights on vCenter itself, your rights on the cluster in question won’t be limited. But nope, you are wrong. Since you are a member of Group B and that has limited rights on the cluster, your rights too are restricted. Bummer if you are a member of multiple groups and some of these groups have limited rights on child objects! :o)

Workaround is to add yourself or Group A explicitly on that cluster, with full rights. Then the permissions become cumulative.

Notes to self while installing NSX 6.3 (part 4)

Reading through the VMware NSX 6.3 Install Guide after having installed the DLR and ESG in my home lab. Continuing from the DLR section.

As I had mentioned earlier NSX provides routing via DLR or ESG.  

  • DLR == Distributed Logical Router.
  • ESG == Edge Services Gateway

DLR consists of an appliance that provides the control plane functionality. This appliance does not do any routing itself. The actual routing is done by the VIBs on the ESXi hosts. The appliance uses the NSX Controller to push out updates to the ESXi host. (Note: Only DLR. ESG does not depend on the Controller to push out route). Couple of points to keep in mind:

  • A DLR instance cannot connect to logical switches in different transport zones. 
  • A DLR cannot connect to a dvPortgroup with VLAN ID 0.
  • A DLR cannot connect to a dvPortgroup with VLAN ID if that DLR also connects to logical switches spanning more than one VDS. 
    • This confused me. Why would a logical switch span more than one VDS? I dunno. There are reasons probably, same way you could have multiple clusters in same data center having different VDSes instead of using the same one. 
  • If you have portgroups on different VDSes with the same VLAN ID, and these VDSes share some hosts, then DLR cannot connect these. 

I am not entirely clear with the above points. It’s more to enforce the transport zones and logical switches align correctly, but I haven’t entirely understood it so I am simply going to make note as above and move on …

In a DLR the firewall rules only apply to the uplink interface and are limited to traffic destined for the edge virtual appliance. In other words they don’t apply to traffic between the logical switches a DLR instance connects. (Note that this refers to the firwall settings found under the DLR section, not in the Firewall section of NSX). 

A DLR has many interfaces. The one exposed to VMs for routing is the Logical InterFace (LIF). Here’s a screenshot from the interfaces on my DLR. 

The ones of type ‘Internal’ are the LIFs. These are the interfaces that the DLR will route between. Each LIF connects to a separate network – in my case a logical switch each. The IP address assigned to this LIF will be the address you set as gateway for the devices in that network. So for example: one of the LIFs has an IP address and connects to my segment. All the VMs there will have as their default gateway. Suppose we ignore the ‘Uplink’ interface for now (it’s optional, I created it for the external routing to work), and all our DLR had were the two ‘Internal’ LIFs, and VMs on each side had the respective IP address set as their default gateway, then our DLR will enable routing between these two networks. 

Unlike a physical router though, which exists outside the virtual network and which you can point to as “here’s my router”, there’s no such concept with DLRs. The DLR isn’t a VM which you can point to as your router. Nor is it a VM to which packets between these networks (logical switches) are sent to for routing. The DLR, as mentioned above, is simply your ESXi hosts. Each ESXi host that has logical switches which a DLR connects into has this LIF created in them with that LIF IP address assigned to it and a virtual MAC so VMs can send packets to it. The DLR is your ESXi host. (That is pretty cool, isn’t it! I shouldn’t be amazed because I had mentioned it earlier when reading about all this, but it is still cool to actually “see” it once I have implemented).

Above screenshot is from my two VMs on the same VXLAN but on different hosts. Note that the default gateway ( MAC is the same for both. Each of their hosts will respond to this MAC entry. 

(Note to self: Need to explore the net-vdr command sometime. Came across it as I was Googling on how to find the MAC address table seen by the LIF on a host. Didn’t want to get side-tracked so didn’t explore too much. There’s something called a VDR (not encountered it yet in my readings).

  • net-vdr -I -l will list all the VDRs on a host.
  • net-vdr -L -l <vdrname> will list the LIFs.
  • net-vdr -N -l <vdrname> will list the MAC addresses (ARP info)


When creating a DLR it is possible to create it with or without the appliance. Remember that the appliance provides the control plane functionality. It is the appliance that learns of new routes etc and pushes to the DLR modules in the ESXi hosts. Without an appliance the DLR modules will do static routing (which might be more than enough, especially in a test environment like my nested lab for instance) so it is ok to skip it if your requirements are such. Adding an appliance means you get to (a) select if it is deployed in HA config (i.e. two appliance), (b) their locations etc, (c) IP address and such for the appliance, as well as enabling SSH. The appliance is connected to a different interface for HA and SSH – this is independent of the LIFs or Uplink interfaces. That interface isn’t used for any routing. 

Apart from the control plane, the appliance also controls the firewall on the DLR. If there’s no appliance you can’t make any firewall changes to the DLR – makes sense coz there’s nothing to change. You won’t be connecting to the DLR for SSH or anything coz you do that to the appliance on the HA interface. 

According to the docs you can’t add an appliance once a DLR instance is deployed. Not sure about that as I do see an option to deploy an appliance on my non-appliance DLR instance. Maybe it will fail when I actually try and create the appliance – I didn’t bother trying. 

Discovered this blog post while Googling for something. I’ve encountered & linked to his posts previously too. He has a lot of screenshots and step by step instructions. So worth a check out if you want to see some screenshots and much better explanation than me. :) Came across some commands from his blog which can be run on the NSX Controller to see the DLRs it is aware of and their interfaces. Pasting the output from my lab here for now, I will have to explore this later …

I have two DLRs. One has an appliance, other doesn’t. I made these two, and a bunch of logical switches to hook these to, to see if there’s any difference in functionality or options.

One thing I realized as part of this exercise is that a particular logical switch can only connect to one DLR. Initially I had one DLR which connected to and Its uplink was on logical switch which is where the ESG too hooked into. Later when I made one more DLR with its own internal links and tried to connect its uplink to the network used by the previous DLR, I saw that it didn’t even appear in the list of options. That’s when I realized its better to use a smaller range logical switch for the uplinks – like say a /30 network. This way each DLR instance connects to an ESG on its own /30 network logical switch (as in the output above). 

A DLR can have up to 8 uplink interfaces and 1000 internal interfaces.

Moving on to ESG. This is a virtual appliance. While a DLR provides East-West routing (i.e. within the virtual environment), an ESG provides North-South routing (i.e. out of the virtual environment). The ESG also provides services such as DHCP, NAT, VPN, and Load Balancing. (Note to self: DLR does not provide DHCP or Load Balancing as one might expect (at least I did! :p). DLR provides DHCP Relay though). 

The uplink of an ESG will be a VDS (Distributed Switch) as that’s what eventually connects an ESXi environment to the physical network. 

An ESG needs an appliance to be deployed. You can enable/ disable SSH into this appliance. If enabled you can SSH into the ESG appliance from the uplink address or from any of the internal link IP addresses. In contrast, you can only SSH into a DLR instance if it has an associated appliance. Even then, you cannot SSH into the appliance from the internal LIFs (coz these don’t really exist, remember … they are on each ESXi host). With a DLR we have to SSH into the interface used for HA (this can be used even if there’s only one appliance and hence no HA). 

When deploying an ESG appliance HA can be enabled. This deploys two appliances in an active/passive mode (and the two appliances will be on separate hosts). These two appliances will talk to each other to keep in sync via one of the internal interfaces (we can specify one, or NSX will just choose any). On this internal interface the appliances will have a link local IP address (a /30 subnet from and communicate over that (doesn’t matter that there’s some other IP range actually used in that segment, as these are link local addresses and unlikely anyone’s going to actually use them). In contrast, if a DLR appliance is deployed with HA we need to specify a separate network from the networks that it be routing between. This can be a logical switch or a DVS, and as with ESG the two appliances will have link local IP addresses (a /30 subnet from for communication. Optionally, we can specify an IP address in this network via which we can SSH into the DLR appliance (this IP address will not be used for HA, however).

After setting up all this, I also created two NAT rules just for kicks. 

And with that my basic setup of NSX is complete! (I skipped OSPF as I don’t think I will be using it any time soon in my immediate line of work; and if I ever need to I can come back to it later). Next I need to explore firewalls (micro-segmentation) and possibly load balancing etc … and generally fiddle around with this stuff. I’ve also got to start figuring out the troubleshooting and command-line stuff. But the base is done – I hope!

Yay! (VXLAN) contd. + Notes to self while installing NSX 6.3 (part 3)

Finally continuing with my NSX adventures … some two weeks have past since my last post. During this time I moved everything from VMware Workstation to ESXi. 

Initially I tried doing a lift and shift from Workstation to ESXi. Actually, initially I went with ESXi 6.5 and that kept crashing. Then I learnt it’s because I was using the HPE customized version of ESXi 6.5 and since the server model I was using isn’t supported by ESXi 6.5 it has a tendency to PSOD. But strangely the non-HPE customized version has no issues. But after trying the HPE version and failing a couple of times, I gave up and went to ESXi 5.5. Set it up, tried exporting from VMware Workstation to ESXi 5.5, and that failed as the VM hardware level on Workstation was newer than ESXi. 

Not an issue – I fired up VMware Converter and converted each VM from Workstation to ESXi. 

Then I thought hmm, maybe the MAC addresses will change and that will cause an issue, so I SSH’ed into the ESXi host and manually changed the MAC addresses of all my VMs to whatever it was in Workstation. Also changed the adapters to VMXNet3 wherever it wasn’t. Reloaded the VMs in ESXi, created all the networks (portgroups) etc, hooked up the VMs to these, and fired them up. That failed coz the MAC address ranges were of VMware Workstation and ESXi refuses to work with those! *grr* Not a problem – change the config files again to add a parameter asking ESXi to ignore this MAC address problem – and finally it all loaded. 

But all my Windows VMs had their adapters reset to a default state. Not sure why – maybe the drivers are different? I don’t know. I had to reconfigure all of them again. Then I turned to OpnSense – that too had reset all its network settings, so I had to configure those too – and finally to nested ESXi hosts. For whatever reason none of them were reachable; and worse, my vCenter VM was just a pain in the a$$. The web client kept throwing some errors and simply refused to open. 

That was the final straw. So in frustration I deleted it all and decided to give up.

But then …

I decided to start afresh. 

Installed ESXi 6.5 (the VMware version, non-HPE) on the host. Created a bunch of nested ESXi VMs in that from scratch. Added a Windows Server 2012R2 as the shared iSCSI storage and router. Created all the switches and port groups etc, hooked them up. Ran into some funny business with the Windows Firewall (I wanted to assign some interface as Private, others as Public, and enable firewall only only the Public ones – but after each reboot Windows kept resetting this). So I added OpnSense into the mix as my DMZ firewall.

So essentially you have my ESXi host -> which hooks into an internal vSwitch portgroup that has the OpnSense VM -> which hooks into another vSwitch portgroup where my Server 2012R2 is connected to, and that in turn connects to another vSwitch portgroup (a couple of them actually) where my ESXi hosts are connected to (need a couple of portgroup as my ESXi hosts have to be in separate L3 networks so I can actually see a benefit of VXLANs). OpnSense provides NAT and firewalling so none of my VMs are exposed from the outside network, yet they can connect to the outside network if needed. (I really love OpnSense by the way! An amazing product). 

Then I got to the task of setting these all up. Create the clusters, shared storage, DVS networks, install my OpenBSD VMs inside these nested EXSi hosts. Then install NSX Manager, deploy controllers, configure the ESXi hosts for NSX, setup VXLANs, segment IDs, transport zones, and finally create the Logical Switches! :) I was pissed off initially at having to do all this again, but on the whole it was good as I am now comfortable setting these up. Practice makes perfect, and doing this all again was like revision. Ran into problems at each step – small niggles, but it was frustrating. Along the way I found that my (virtual) network still does not seem to support large MTU sizes – but then I realized it’s coz my Server 2012R2 VM (which is the router) wasn’t setup with the large MTU size. Changed that, and that took care of the MTU issue. Now both Web UI and CLI tests for VXLAN succeed. Finally!

Third time lucky hopefully. Above are my two OpenBSD VMs on the same VXLAN, able to ping each other. They are actually on separate L3 ESXi hosts so without NSX they won’t be able to see each other. 

Not sure why there are duplicate packets being received. 

Next I went ahead and set up a DLR so there’s communicate between VXLANs. 

Yeah baby! :o)

Finally I spent some time setting up an ESG and got these OpenBSD VMs talking to my external network (and vice versa). 

The two command prompt windows are my Server 2012R2 on the LAN. It is able to ping the OpenBSD VMs and vice versa. This took a bit more time – not on the NSX side – as I forgot to add the routing info on the ESG for my two internal networks ( and as well on the Server 2012R2 ( Once I did that routing worked as above. 

I am aware this is more of a screenshots plus talking post rather than any techie details, but I wanted to post this here as a record for myself. I finally got this working! Yay! Now to read the docs and see what I missed out and what I can customize. Time to break some stuff finally (intentionally). 


Find the profiles in an offline ESXi update zip file

I use esxcli to manually update our ESXi hosts that don’t have access to VUM (e.g. our DMZ hosts). I do so via command-line:

Usually the VMware page where I download the patch from mentions the profile name, but today I had a patch file and wanted to find the list of profiles it had. 

One way is to open the zip file, then the file in that, and that should contain a list of profiles. Another way is to use esxcli

Screenshot example:

Yay! (VXLAN)

I decided to take a break from my NSX reading and just go ahead and set up a VXLAN in my test lab. Just go with a hunch of what I think the options should be based on what the menus ask me and what I have read so far. Take a leap! :)

*Ahem* The above is actually incorrect, and I am an idiot. A super huge idiot! Each VM is actually just pinging itself and not the other. Unbelievable! And to think that I got all excited thinking I managed to do something without reading the docs etc. The steps below are incomplete. I should just delete this post, but I wrote this much and had a moment of excitement that day … so am just leaving it as it is with this note. 

Above we have two OpenBSD VMs running in my nested EXIi hypervisors. 

  • obsd-01 is running on host 1, which is on network
  • obsd-02 is running on host 2, which is on network 
  • Note that each host is on a separate L3 network.
  • Each host is in a cluster of its own (doesn’t matter but just mentioning) and they connect to the same VDS.
  • In that VDS there’s a port group for VMs and that’s where obsd-01 and obsd-02 connect to. 
  • Without NSX, since the hosts are on separate networks, the two VMs wouldn’t be able to see each other. 
  • With NSX, I am able to create a VXLAN network on the VDS such that both VMs are now on the same network.
    • I put the VMs on a network so that’s my overlay network. 
    • VXLANs are basically port groups within your NSX enhanced VDS. The same way you don’t specify IP/ network information on the VMware side when creating a regular portgroup, you don’t do anything when creating the VXLAN portgroup either. All that is within the VMs on the portgroup.
  • A VDS uses VMKernel ports (vmk ports) to carry out the actual traffic. These are virtual ports bound to the physical NICs on an ESXi host, and there can be multiple vmk ports per VDS for various tasks (vMotion, FT, etc). Similar to this we need to create a new vmk port for the host to connect into the VTEP used by the VXLAN. 
    • Unlike regular vmk ports though we don’t create and assign IP addresses manually. Instead we either use DHCP or create an IP pool when configuring the VXLAN for a cluster. (It is possible to specify a static IP either via DHCP reservation or as mentioned in the install guide). 
    • Each cluster uses one VDS for its VXLAN traffic. This can be a pre-existing VDS – there’s nothing special about it just that you point to it when enabling VXLAN on a cluster; and the vmk port is created on this VDS. NSX automatically creates another portgroup, which is where the vmk port is assigned to. 

And that’s where I am so far. After doing this I went through the chapter for configuring VXLAN in the install guide and I was pretty much on the right track. Take a look at that chapter for more screenshots and info. 

Yay, my first VXLAN! :o)

p.s. I went ahead with OpenBSD in my nested environment coz (a) I like OpenBSD (though I have never got to play around much with it); (b) it has a simple & fast install process and I am familiar with it; (c) the ISO file is small, so doesn’t take much space in my ISO library; (d) OpenBSD comes with VMware tools as part of the kernel, so nothing additional to install; (e) I so love that it still has a simple rc based system and none of that systemd stuff that newer Linux distributions have (not that there’s anything wrong with systemd just that I am unfamiliar with it and rc is way simpler for my needs); (f) the base install has manpages for all the commands unlike minimal Linux ISOs that usually seem to skip these; (g) take a look at this memory usage! :o)

p.p.s. Remember to disable the PF firewall via pfctl -d.

Yay again! :o)

Update: Short-lived excitement sadly. A while later the VMs stopped communicating. Turns out VMware Workstation doesn’t support MTU larger than 1500 bytes, and VXLAN requires 1600 byte. So the VTEP interfaces of both ESXi hosts are unable to talk to each other. Bummer!

Update 2: I finally got this working. Turns out I had missed some stuff; and also I had to make some changes to allows VMware Workstation to with larger MTU sizes. I’ll blog this in a later post

Notes to self while installing NSX 6.3 (part 1)

(No sense or order here. These are just notes I took when installing NSX 6.3 in my home lab, while reading this excellent NSX for Newbies series and the NSX 6.3 install guide from VMware (which I find to be quite informative). Splitting these into parts as I have been typing this for a few days).

You can install NSX Manager in VMware Workstation (rather than in the nested ESXi installation if you are doing it in a home lab). You won’t get a chance to configure the IP address, but you can figure it from your DHCP server. Browse to that IP in a browser and login as username “admin” password “default” (no double quotes). 

If you want to add a certificate from your AD CA to NSX Manager create the certificate as usual in Certificate Manager. Then export the generated certificate and your root CA and any intermediate CA certificates as a “Base-64 encoded X.509 (.CER)” file. Then concatenate all these certificates into a single file (basically, open up Notepad and make a new file that has all these certificates in it). Then you can import it into NSX Manager. (More details here).

During the Host Preparation step on an ESXi 5.5 host it failed with the following error: 

“Could not install image profile: ([], “Error in running [‘/etc/init.d/vShield-Stateful-Firewall’, ‘start’, ‘install’]:\nReturn code: 1\nOutput: vShield-Stateful-Firewall is not running\nwatchdog-dfwpktlogs: PID file /var/run/vmware/watchdog-dfwpktlogs.PID does not exist\nwatchdog-dfwpktlogs: Unable to terminate watchdog: No running watchdog process for dfwpktlogs\nFailed to release memory reservation for vsfwd\nResource pool ‘host/vim/vmvisor/vsfwd’ release failed. retrying..\nResource pool ‘host/vim/vmvisor/vsfwd’ release failed. retrying..\nResource pool ‘host/vim/vmvisor/vsfwd’ release failed. retrying..\nResource pool ‘host/vim/vmvisor/vsfwd’ release failed. retrying..\nResource pool ‘host/vim/vmvisor/vsfwd’ release failed. retrying..\nSet memory minlimit for vsfwd to 256MB\nFailed to set memory reservation for vsfwd to 256MB, trying for 256MB\nFailed to set memory reservation for vsfwd to failsafe value of 256MB\nMemory reservation released for vsfwd\nResource pool ‘host/vim/vmvisor/vsfwd’ released.\nResource pool creation failed. Not starting vShield-Stateful-Firewall\n\nIt is not safe to continue. Please reboot the host immediately to discard the unfinished update.”)” Error 3/16/2017 5:17:49 AM esx55-01.fqdn

Initially I thought maybe NSX 6.3 wasn’t compatible with ESXi 5.5 or that I was on an older version of ESXi 5.5 – so I Googled around on pre-requisites (ESXi 5.5 seems to be fine) and also updated ESXi 5.5 to the latest version. Then I took a closer look at the error message above and saw the bit about the 256MB memory reservation. My ESXi 5.5 host only had 3GB RAM (I had installed with 4GB and reduced it to 3GB) so I bumped it up to 4GB RAM and tried again. And voila! the install worked. So NSX 6.3 requires an ESXi 5.5 host with minimum 4GB RAM (well maybe 3.5 GB RAM works too – I was too lazy to try!) :o)

If you want, you can browse to “https://<NSX_MANAGER_IP>/bin/vdn/” to manually download the VIBs that get installed as part of the Host Preparation. This is in case you want to do a manual install (thought had crossed my mind as part of troubleshooting above).

NSX Manager is your management layer. You install it first and it communicates with vCenter server. A single NSX Manager install is sufficient. There’s one NSX Manager per vCenter. 

The next step after installing NSX Manager is to install NSX Controllers. These are installed in odd numbers to maintain quorum. This is your control plane. Note: No data traffic flows through the controllers. The NSX Controllers perform many roles and each role has a master controller node (if this node fails another one takes its place via election). 

Remember that in NSX the VXLAN is your data plane. NSX supports three control plane modes: multicast, unicast, and hybrid when it comes to BUM (Broadcast, unknown Unicast, and Multicast) traffic. BUM traffic is basically traffic that doesn’t have a specific Layer 3 destination. (More info: [1], [2], [3] … and many on the Internet but these three are what I came across initially via Google searches).

  • In unicast mode a host replicates all BUM traffic to all other hosts on the same VXLAN and also picks a host in every other VXLAN to do the same for hosts in their VXLANs. Thus there’s no dependence on the underlying hardware. There could, however, be increased traffic as the number of VXLANs increase. Note that in the case of unknown unicast the host first checks with the NSX Controller for more info. (That’s the impression I get at least from the [2] post above – I am not entirely clear). 
  • In multicast mode a host depends on the underlying networking hardware to replicate BUM traffic via multicast. All hosts on all VXLAN segments join multicast groups so any BUM traffic can be replicated by the network hardware to this multicast group. Obviously this mode requires hardware support. Note that multicast is used for both Layer 2 and Layer 3 here. 
  • In hybrid mode some of the BUM traffic replication is handed over to the first hop physical switch (so rather than a host sending unicast traffic to all other hosts connected to the same physical switch it relies on the switch to do this) while the rest of the replication is done by the host to hosts in other VXLANs. Note that multicast is used only for Layer 2 here. Also note that as in the unicast mode, in the case of unknown unicast traffic the Controller is consulted first. 

NSX Edge provides the routing. This is either via the Distributed Logical Router (DLR), which is installed on the hypervisor + a DLR virtual appliance; or via the Edge Services Gateway (ESG), which is a virtual appliance. 

  • A DLR can have up to 8 uplink interfaces and 1000 internal interfaces.
    • A DLR uplink typically connects to an ESG via a Layer 2 logical switch. 
    • DLR virtual appliance can be set up in HA mode – in an active/ standby configuration.
      • Created from NSX Manager?
    • The DLR virtual appliance is the control plane – it supports dynamic routing protocols and exchanges routing updates with Layer 3 devices (usually ESG).
      • Even if this virtual appliance is down the routing isn’t affected. New routes won’t be learnt that’s all.
    • The ESXi hypervisors have DLR VIBs which contain the routing information etc. got from the controllers (note: not from the DLR virtual appliance). This the data layer. Performs ARP lookup, route lookup etc. 
      • The VIBs also add a Logical InterFace (LIF) to the hypervisor. There’s one for each Logical Switch (VXLAN) the host connects to. Each LIF, of each host, is set to the default gateway IP of that Layer 2 segment. 
  • An ESG can have up to 10 uplink and internal interfaces. (With a trunk an ESG can have up to 200 sub-interfaces). 
    • There can be multiple ESG appliances in a datacenter. 
    • Here’s how new routes are learnt: NSX Edge Gateway (EGW) learns a new route -> This is picked up by the DLR virtual appliance as they are connected -> DLR virtual appliance passes this info to the NSX Controllers -> NSX Controllers pass this to the ESXi hosts.
    • The ESG is what connects to the uplink. The DLR connects to ESG via a Logical Switch. 

Logical Switch – this is the switch for a VXLAN. 

NSX Edge provides Logical VPNs, Logical Firewall, and Logical Load Balancer. 

TIL: Control Plane & Data Plane (networking)

Reading a bit of networking stuff, which is new to me, as I am trying to understand and appreciate NSX (instead of already diving into it). Hence a few of these TIL posts like this one and the previous. 

One common term I read in the context of NSX or SDN (Software Defined Networking) in general is “control plane” and “data plane” (a.k.a “forwarding” plane). 

This forum post is a good intro. Basically, when it comes to Networking your network equipment does two sort of things. One is the actual pushing of packets that come to it to others. The other is figuring out what packets need to go where. The latter is where various networking protocols like RIP and EIGRP come in. Control plane traffic is used to update a network device’s routing tables or configuration state, and its processing happens on the network device itself.  Data plane traffic passes through the router. Control plane traffic determines what should be done with the data plane traffic. Another way of thinking about control plan and data planes is where the traffic originates from/ is destined to. Basically, control plane traffic is sent to/ from the network devices to control it (e.g RIP, EIGRP); while data plane traffic is what passes through a network device.

( Control plane traffic doesn’t necessarily mean its traffic for controlling a network device. For example, SSH or Telnet could be used to connect to a network device and control it, but it’s not really in the control plane. These come more under a “management” plane – which may or may not be considered as a separate plane. )

Once you think of network devices along these lines, you can see that a device’s actual work is in the data plane. How fast can it push packets through. Yes, it needs to know where to push packets through to, but the two aren’t tied together. It’s sort of like how one might think of a computer as being hardware (CPU) + software (OS) tied together. If we imagine the two as tied together, then we are limiting ourselves on how much each of these can be pushed. If improvements in the OS require improvements in the CPU then we limit ourselves – the two can only be improved in-step. But if the OS improvements can happen independent of the underlying CPU (yes, a newer CPU might help the OS take advantage of newer features or perform better, but it isn’t a requirement) then OS developers can keep innovating on the OS irrespective of CPU manufacturers. In fact, OS developers can use any CPU as long as there are clearly defined interfaces between the OS and the CPU. Similarly, CPU manufacturers can innovate independent of the OS. Ultimately if we think (very simply) of CPUs as having a function of quickly processing data, and OS as a platform that can make use of a CPU to do various processing tasks, we can see that the two are independent and all that’s required is a set of interfaces between them. This is how things already are with computers so what I mentioned just now doesn’t sound so grand or new, but this wasn’t always the case. 

With SDN we try to decouple the control and data planes. The data plane then is the physical layer comprising of network devices or servers. They are programmable and expose a set of interfaces. The control plane now can be a VM or something independent of the physical hardware of the data plane. It is no longer limited to what a single network device sees. The control plane is aware of the whole infrastructure and accordingly informs/ configures the data plane devices.  

If you want a better explanation of what I was trying to convey above, this article might help. 

In the context of NSX its data plane would be the VXLAN based Logical Switches and the ESXi hosts that make it up. And its control plane would be the NSX Controllers. It’s the NSX Controllers that takes care of knowing what to do with the network traffic. It identifies all these, informs the hosts that are part of the data plane accordingly, and let them do the needful. The NSX Controller VMs are deployed in odd numbers (preferably 3 or higher, though you could get away with 1 too) for HA and cluster quorum (that’s why odd numbers) but they are independent of the data plane. Even if all the NSX Controllers are down the data flow would not be affected

I saw a video from Scott Shenker on the future of networking and the past of protocols. Here’s a link to the slides, and here’s a link to the video on YouTube. I think the video is a must watch. Here’s some of the salient points from the video+slides though – mainly as a reminder to myself (note: since I am not a networking person I am vague at many places as I don’t understand it myself):

  • Layering is a useful thing. Layering is what made networking successful. The TCP/IP model, the OSI model. Basically you don’t try and think of the “networking problem” as a big composite thing, but you break it down into layers with each layer doing one task and the layer above it assuming that the layer below it has somehow solved that problem. It’s similar to Unix pipes and all that. Break the problem into discrete parts with interfaces, and each part does what it does best and assumes the part below it is taking care of what it needs to do. 
  • This layering was useful when it came to the data plane mentioned above. That’s what TCP/IP is all about anyways – getting stuff from one point to another. 
  • The control plane used to be simple. It was just about the L2 or L3 tables – where to send a frame to, or where to send a packet to. Then the control plane got complicated by way of ACLs and all that (I don’t know what all to be honest as I am not a networking person :)). There was no “academic” approach to solving this problem similar to how the data plane was tackled; so we just kept adding more and more protocols to the mix to simply solve each issue as it came along. This made things even more complicated, but that’s OK as the people who manage all these liked the complexity and it worked after all. 
  • A good quote (from Don Norman) – “The ability to master complexity is not the same as the ability to extract simplicity“. Well said! So simple and prescient. 
    • It’s OK if you are only good at mastering complexity. But be aware of that. Don’t be under a misconception that just because you are good at mastering the complexity you can also extract simplicity out of it. That’s the key thing. Don’t fool yourself. :)
  • In the context of the control plane, the thing is we have learnt to master its complexity but not learnt to extract simplicity from it. That’s the key problem. 
    • To give an analogy with programming, we no longer think of programming in terms of machine language or registers or memory spaces. All these are abstracted away. This abstraction means a programmer can focus on tackling the problem in a totally different way compared to how he/ she would have had to approach it if they had to take care of all the underlying issues and figure it out. Abstraction is a very useful tool. E.g. Object Oriented Programming, Garbage Collection. Extract simplicity! 
  • Another good quote (from Barbara Liskov) – “Modularity based on abstraction is the way things get done“.
    • Or put another way :) Abstractions -> Interfaces -> Modularity (you abstract away stuff; provide interfaces between them; and that leads to modularity). 
  • As mentioned earlier the data plan has good abstraction, interfaces, and modularity (the layers). Each layer has well defined interfaces and the actual implementation of how a particular layer gets things done is down to the protocols used in that layer or its implementations. The layers above and below do not care. E.g. Layer 3 (IP) expects Layer 2 to somehow get it’s stuff done. The fact that it uses Ethernet and Frames etc is of no concern to IP. 
  • So, what are the control plane problems in networking? 
    • We need to be able to compute the configuration state of each network device. As in what ACLs are it supposed to be applying, what its forwarding tables are like …
    • We need to be able to do this while operating without communication guarantees. So we have to deal with communication delays or packet drops etc as changes are pushed out. 
    • We also need to be able to do this while operating within the limitations of the protocol we are using (e.g. IP). 
  • Anyone trying to master the control plane has to deal with all three. To give an analogy with programming, it is as though a programmer had to worry about where data is placed in RAM, take care of memory management and process communication etc. No one does that now. It is all magically taken care of by the underlying system (like the OS or the programming language itself). The programmer merely focuses on what they need to do. Something similar is required for the control plane. 
  • What is needed?
    • We need an abstraction for computing the configuration state of each device. [Specification Abstraction]
      • Instead of thinking of how to compute the configuration state of a device or how to change a configuration state, we just declare what we want and it is magically taken care of. You declare how things should be, and the underlying system takes care of making it so. 
      • We think in terms of specifications. If the intention is that Device A should not have access to Device B, we simply specify that in the language of our model without thinking of the how in terms of the underlying physical model. The shift in thinking here is that we view each thing as a layer and only focus on that. To implement a policy that Device A should not have access to Device B we do not need to think of the network structure or the devices in between – all that is just taken care of (by the Network Operating System, so to speak). 
      • This layer is  Network Virtualization. We have a simplified model of the network that we work with and which we specify how it should be, and the Network Virtualization takes care of actually implementing it. 
    • We need an abstraction that captures the lack of communication guarantees- i.e. the distributed state of the system. [Distributed State Abstraction]
      • Instead of thinking how to deal with the distributed network we abstract it away and assume that it is magically taken care of. 
      • Each device has access to an annotated network graph that they can query for whatever info they want. A global network view, so to say. 
      • There is some layer that gathers an overall picture of the network from all the devices and presents this global view to the devices. (We can think of this layer as being a central source of information, but it can be decentralized too. Point is that’s an implementation problem for whoever designs that layer). This layer is the Network Operating System, so to speak. 
    • We need an abstraction of the underlying protocol so we don’t have to deal with it directly.  [Forwarding Abstraction]
      • Network devices have a Management CPU and a Forwarding ASIC. We need an abstraction for both. 
      • The Management CPU abstraction can be anything. The ASIC abstraction is OpenFlow. 
      • This is the layer that closest to the hardware. 
  • SDN abstracts these three things – distribution, forwarding, and configuration. 
    • You have a Control Program that configures an abstract network view based on the operator requirements (note: this doesn’t deal with the underlying hardware at all) ->
    • You have a Network Virtualization layer that takes this abstract network view and maps it to a global view based on the underlying physical hardware (the specification abstraction) ->
    • You have a Network OS that communicates this global network view to all the physical devices to make it happen (the distributed state abstraction (for disseminating the information) and the forwarding abstraction (for configuring the hardware)).
  • Very important: Each piece of the above architecture has a very limited job that doesn’t involve the overall picture. 

From this Whitepaper:

SDN has three layers: (1) an Application layer, (2) a Control layer (the Control Program mentioned above), and (3) an Infrastructure layer (the network devices). 

The Application layer is where business applications reside. These talk to the Control Program in the Control layer via APIs. This way applications can program their network requirements directly. 

OpenFlow (mentioned in Scott’s talk under the ASIC abstraction) is the interface between the control plane and the data/ forwarding place. Rather than paraphrase, let me quote from that whitepaper for my own reference:

OpenFlow is the first standard communications interface defined between the control and forwarding layers of an SDN architecture. OpenFlow allows direct access to and manipulation of the forwarding plane of network devices such as switches and routers, both physical and virtual (hypervisor-based). It is the absence of an open interface to the forwarding plane that has led to the characterization of today’s networking devices as monolithic, closed, and mainframe-like. No other standard protocol does what OpenFlow does, and a protocol like OpenFlow is needed to move network control out of the networking switches to logically centralized control software.

OpenFlow can be compared to the instruction set of a CPU. The protocol specifies basic primitives that can be used by an external software application to program the forwarding plane of network devices, just like the instruction set of a CPU would program a computer system.

OpenFlow uses the concept of flows to identify network traffic based on pre-defined match rules that can be statically or dynamically programmed by the SDN control software. It also allows IT to define how traffic should flow through network devices based on parameters such as usage patterns, applications, and cloud resources. Since OpenFlow allows the network to be programmed on a per-flow basis, an OpenFlow-based SDN architecture provides extremely granular control, enabling the network to respond to real-time changes at the application, user, and session levels. Current IP-based routing does not provide this level of control, as all flows between two endpoints must follow the same path through the network, regardless of their different requirements.

I don’t think OpenFlow is used by NSX though. It is used by Open vSwitch and was used by NVP (Nicira Virtualization Platform – the predecessor of NSX).

Speaking of NVP and NSX: VMware acquired NSX from Nicira (which was a company founded by Martin Casado, Nick McKeown and Scott Shenker – the same Scott Shenker whose video I was watching above). The product was called NVP back then and primarily ran on the Xen hypervisor. VMware renamed it to NSX and it was has two flavors. NSX-V is the version that runs on the VMware ESXi hypervisor, and is in active development. There’s also NSX-MH which is a “multi-hypervisor” version that’s supposed to be able to run on Xen, KVM, etc. but I couldn’t find much information on it. There’s some presentation slides in case anyone’s interested. 

Before I conclude here’s some more blog posts related to all this. They are in order of publishing so we get a feel of how things have progressed. I am starting to get a headache reading all this network stuff, most of which is going above my head, so I am going to take a break here and simply link to the articles (with minimal/ half info) and not go much into it. :)

  • This one talks about how the VXLAN specification doesn’t specify any control plane.
    • There is no way for hosts participating in a VXLAN network to know the MAC addresses of other hosts or VMs in the VXLAN so we need some way of achieving that. 
    • Nicira NVP uses OpenFlow as a control-plane protocol. 
  • This one talks about how OpenFlow is used by Nicira NVP. Some points of interest:
    • Each Open vSwitch (OVS) implementation has 1) a flow-based forwarding module loaded in the kernel; 2) an agent that communicates with the Controller; and 3) an OVS DB daemon that keeps track of of the local configuration. 
    • NVP had clusters of 3 or 5 controllers. These used OpenFlow protocol to download forwarding entries into the OVS and OVSDB (a.k.a. ovsdb-daemon) to configure the OVS itself  (creating/ deleting/ modifying bridges, interfaces, etc). 
    • Read that post on how the forwarding tables and tunnel interfaces are modified as new devices join the overlay network. 
    • Broadcast traffic, unknown Unicast traffic, and Multicast traffic (a.k.a. BUM traffic) can be handled in two ways – either by sending these to an extra server that replicates these to all devices in the overlay network; or the source hypervisor/ physical device can encapsulate the BUM frame and send it as unicast to all the other devices in that overlay. 
  • This one talks about how Nicira NVP seems to be moving away from OpenFlow or supplementing it with something (I am not entirely clear).
    • This is a good read though just that I was lost by this point coz I have been doing this reading for nearly 2 days and it’s starting to get tiring. 

One more post from the author of the three posts above. It’s a good read. Kind of obvious stuff, but good to see in pictures. That author has some informative posts – wish I was more brainy! :)

TIL: VXLAN is a standard

VXLAN == Virtual eXtensible LAN.

While reading about NSX I was under the impression VXLAN is something VMware cooked up and owns (possibly via Nicira, which is where NSX came from). But turns out that isn’t the case. It was originally created by VMware & Cisco (check out this Register article – a good read) and is actually covered under an RFC 7348. The encapsulation mechanism is standardized, and so is the UDP port used for communication (port number 4789 by the way). A lot of vendors now support VXLAN, and similar to NSX being an implementation of VXLAN we also have Open vSwitch. Nice!

(Note to self: got to read more about Open vSwitch. It’s used in XenServer and is a part of Linux. The *BSDs too support it). 

VXLAN is meant to both virtualize Layer 2 and also replace VLANs. You can have up to 16 million VXLANs (the NSX Logical Switches I mentioned earlier). In contrast you are limited to 4094 VLANs. I like the analogy of how VXLAN is to IP addresses how cell phones are to telephone numbers. Prior to cell phones, when everyone had landline numbers, your phone number was tied to your location. If you shifted houses/ locations you got a new phone number. In contrast, with cell phones numbers it doesn’t matter where you are as the number is linked to you, not your location. Similarly with VXLAN your VM IP address is linked to the VM, not its location. 


  • Found a good whitepaper by Arista on VXLANs. Something I hadn’t realized earlier was that the 24bit VXLAN Network Identifier is called VNI (this is what lets you have 16 millions VXLAN segments/ NSX Logical Switches) and that a VM’s MAC is combined with its VNI – thus allowing multiple VMs with the same MAC address to exist across the network (as long as they are on separate VXNETs). 
  • Also, while I am noting acronyms I might as well also mention VTEPs. These stand for Virtual Tunnel End Points. This is the “thing” that encapsulates/ decapsulates packets for VXLAN. This can be virtual bridges in the hypervisor (ESXi or any other); or even VXLAN aware VM applications or VXLAN capable switching hardware (wasn’t aware of this until I read the Arista whitepaper). 
  • VTEP communicates over UDP. The port number is 4789 (NSX 6.2.3 and later) or 8472 (pre-NSX 6.2.3).
  • A post by Duncan Epping on VXLAN use cases. Probably dated in terms of the VXLAN issues it mentions (traffic tromboning) but I wanted to link it here as (a) it’s a good read and (b) it’s good to know such issues as that will help me better understand why things might be a certain way now (because they are designed to work around such issues). 

vSphere Distributed Switches are Layer 2 devices (doh!)

This is a very basic post. Was trying to read up on NSX and before I could appreciate it I wanted to go down and explore how things are without NSX so I can better understand what NSX is trying to do. I wanted to put it down in writing as I spent some time on it, but there’s nothing new or grand here.

So. vSphere Distributed Switches (VDS). These are Layer 2 switches that exist on each ESX host and which contain port groups that you can connect VMs running on a host onto. In case it wasn’t obvious from the name “switch”, these are Layer 2. Which means that all the hosts connecting to a particular Distributed Switch must be on the same Layer 2. Once you create a Distributed Switch and add ESXi hosts and their physical NICs to it, you can create VMKernel ports for Management, vMotion, Fault Tolerance, etc but these VMKernel ports aren’t used by the port groups you create on the Distributed Switch. The port groups are just like Layer 2 switches – they communicate via broadcasting using the underlying physical NICs that are assigned to the Distributed Switch; but since there’s no IP address as such assigned to a port group there’s no routing involved. (This is an obvious point but I keep forgetting it).

For example say you have two ESX hosts – HostA and HostB – and these are on two separate physical networks (i.e. separated by a router). You create a new Distributed Switch comprising of a physical NIC each from each host. Then you make a port group on this switch and put VM-A on HostA and VM-B on HostB. When creating the Distributed Switch and adding physical NICs to it, VMware doesn’t care if the physical NICs aren’t in the same Layer 2 domain. It will happily add the NICs but when you try to send traffic from VM-A to VM-B it will fail. That’s because when VM-A tries to communicate with VM-B (let’s assume these two VMs know each others MAC address so there’s no need for ARP communication first), VM-A will send Ethernet frames to the Distributed Switch on HostA who will then broadcast it to the Layer 2 network its physical NIC assigned to the Distributed Switch is connected to. Since these broadcasted frames won’t reach the physical NIC of HostB the VM-B there never sees it, and so the two VMs cannot communicate with each other. 

So – keep in mind that all physical NICs connecting to the same Distributed Switch must be on the same Layer 2. If the underlying physical NICs are on separate Layer 3 networks, and these Layer 3 networks have connectivity to each other, it doesn’t matter – the VMs in the port groups will not be able to communicate. 

And this is where NSX comes in. Using the concept of VXLANs, NSX stretches a Layer 2 network across Layer 3. Basically it encapsulates the Layer 2 traffic within Layer 3 packets and gives the illusion of all VMs being on the same Layer 2 network – but this illusion is what Network Virtualization if all about, right? :) VXLAN is an overlay

VXLAN encapsulates Layer 2 frames in UDP packets. The VXLAN is like a tunnel to which all the hosts connecting to this VXLAN hook into. On each host there’s something called a Virtual Tunnel End Point (VTEP) which is the “thing” that actually hooks into the VXLAN. If a VXLAN is a Distributed Switch made up of physical NICs from the host, the VTEP is the VMKernel ports of this Distributed Switch that do the actual communication (like how vMotion traffic between two hosts happens via the VMKernel ports you assign for vMotion). In fact, during an NSX install you install three VIBs on the ESXi hosts – one of these enhances the existing Distributed Switch with VXLAN capabilities (the encapsulation stuff  I mentioned above). 

Once you have NSX you can create multiple Logical Switches. These are basically VXLAN switches that operate like Layer 2 switches but can actually stretch multiple Layer 3 networks. Logical Switches are overlay switches. ;o) Each Logical Switch corresponds to one VXLAN. 

ps. VXLAN is one of the cool features of NSX. The other cool features are the Distributed Logical Router (DLR) and the Distributed Firewall (DFW). I mentioned that a ESXi host has 3 VIBs installed as part of NSX, and that one of them is VXLAN functionality? Well the other two are DLR and DFW (god, so many acronyms!). Prior to DLR if an ESXi host had two VMs connected to different Distributed Switches, and if these two hosts wanted to talk to each other, the traffic would go down from one of the VMs, to the host, to the underlying physical network router, and back to the host and up to the VM on the other Distributed Switch. But with DLR, the ESXi hypervisor kernel can do Layer 3 routing too, so it will simply send traffic directly to the VM in the other Distributed Switch. 

Similarly, DFW just means each ESXi hypervisor can also apply firewall rules to the packets, so you don’t need one centralized firewall place any more. You simply create rules and push it out to the ESXi hosts and they can do firewalling between VMs. Everything is virtual! :)

pps. Some other jargon. East-West traffic means network traffic that’s usually within or between servers (ESXi hosts in our case). North-South traffic means any other network traffic – basically, traffic that goes out of this layer of ESXi hosts. With NSX you try and have more traffic East-West rather than North-South. 

TIL: Transparent Page Sharing (TPS) between VMs is disabled by default

(TIL is short for “Today I Learned” by the way).

I always thought an ESXi host did some page sharing of VM memory between the VMs running on it. The feature is called Transparent Page Sharing (TPS) and it was something I remember from my VMware course and also read in blog posts such as this and this. The idea is that if you have (say) a bunch of Server 2012R2 VMs running on a host, it’s quite likely these VMs have quite a bit of common stuff between them in RAM, so it makes sense for the ESXi host to share that common stuff between the hosts. So even if each VM has (say) 4 GB RAM assigned to it, and there’s about 2GB worth of stuff common between the VMs, the host only needs to use 2GB shared RAM + 2 x 2GB private RAM for a total of 6GB RAM. 

Apart from this as the host is under increased memory pressure it resorts to techniques like ballooning and memory swapping to free up some RAM for itself. 

I even made a script today to list out all the VMs in our environment that have greater than 8GB RAM assigned to them and are powered on and to list the amount of shared RAM (just for my own info). 

Anyhow – around 2015 VMware stopped page sharing of VM memory between VMs. VMware calls this sort of RAM sharing as inter-VM TPS. Apparently this is a security risk and VMware likes to ship their products as secure by default, so via some patches to the 5.x series (and as default in the 6.x series) it turned off inter-VM TPS and introduced some controls that allow IT Admins to turn this on if they so wish. Intra-VM TPS is still enabled – i.e. the ESXi host will do page sharing within each VM – but it not longer does page sharing between VMs by default. 

Using the newly introduced controls, however, it is possible to enable inter-VM TPS for all VMs, or selectively between some VMs. Quoting from this blog post

You can set a virtual machine’s advanced parameter sched.mem.pshare.salt to control its ability to participate in transparent page sharing.  

TPS is only allowed within a virtual machine (intra-VM TPS) by default, because the ESXi host configuration option Mem.ShareForceSalting is set to 2, the sched.mem.pshare.salt is not present in the virtual machine configuration file, and thus the virtual machine salt value is set to unique value. In this case, to allow TPS among a specific set of virtual machines, set the sched.mem.pshare.salt of each virtual machine in the set to an identical value.  

Alternatively, to enable TPS among all virtual machines (inter-VM TPS), you can set Mem.ShareForceSalting to 0, which causes sched.mem.pshare.salt to be ignored and to have no impact.

Or, to enable inter-VM TPS as the default, but yet allow the use of sched.mem.pshare.salt to control the effect of TPS per virtual machine, set the value of Mem.ShareForceSalting to 1. In this case, change the value of sched.mem.pshare.salt per virtual machine to prevent it from sharing with all virtual machines and restrict it to sharing with those that have an identical setting.


I wonder if intra-VM TPS has much memory savings. Looking at the output from my script for our estate I see that many of our server VMs have about half their allocated RAM as shared, so it does make an impact. I guess it will also make a difference when moving to a container architecture wherein a single VM might have many containers. 

I would also like to point out to this blog post and another blog post I came across from it on whether inter-VM TPS even makes much sense in today’s environments and also on the kind of impact it can have during vMotion etc. Good stuff. I am still reading these but wanted to link to them for reference. Mainly – nowadays we have larger page sizes and so the probability of finding an identical page to be shared between two VMs is low; then there is NUMA that places memory pages closer to the CPU and TPS could disrupt that; and also, TPS is a process that runs periodically to compare pages, so there is an operational cost as it runs and finds a match and then does a full compare of the two pages to ensure they are really identical. 

Good to know. 

Reboot a bunch of ESXi hosts one after the other

Not a big deal, I know, but I felt like posting this. :)

Our HP Gen8 ESXi hosts were randomly crashing ever since we applied the latest ESXi 5.5 updates to them in December. Logged a call with HP and turns out until a proper fix is issued by VMware/ HPE we need to change a setting on all our hosts and reboot them. I didn’t want to do it manually, so I used PowerCLI to do it en masse.

Here’s the script I wrote to target Gen8 hosts and make the change:

I could have done the reboot along with this, but I didn’t want to. Instead I copy pasted the list of affected hosts into a text file (called ESXReboot.txt in the script below) and wrote another script to put them into maintenance mode and reboot one by one.

The screenshot output is slightly different from what you would get from the script as I modified it a bit since taking the screenshot. Functionality-wise there’s no change.

VCSA migration – “A problem occurred while logging in. Verify the connection details.”

So, I was trying out a Windows vCenter 5.5 to VCSA 6.5 appliance migration and at the stage where I enter the target ESX host name where the appliance will be deployed to I got the above error.

Wasted the better part of my day troubleshooting this as I could find absolutely no mention of what was causing this. The installer log had the following but that didn’t shed much light either.

Tried stuff like 1) try a different ESX host, 2) update it to a later version (it was 5.5 Build 3568722), 3) turn on the ESX Shell and SSH in case that mattered – but nothing helped!

Nothing came up regarding the “vimService creation failed: Error” line either. But then I began Googling on “vimService” and learnt that it is the vSphere Management SDK and that you access the SDK via a URL like https://servername/sdk. That got me thinking whether the VCSA installer looks to the proxy settings of the machine where I am running it from, so I turned off the proxy settings in IE – and that helped!

Who would have thought. :)