Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration
-
@matteo-nunziati said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
Just adding "for test" or similar in the title would benefit.
You can test Microsoft server operating systems for 180 days if I remember correctly. No need to test SMB shares with Hyper-V
-
@bnrstnr mmm... Yeah. Even test doesn't fit here.
-
It may have made sense to spin up Hyper-V in the past because a full standard server install takes much longer, but with the 2016 core server option, I'm sure that's just as fast, if not faster, to install.
-
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
It may have made sense to spin up Hyper-V in the past because a full standard server install takes much longer, but with the 2016 core server option, I'm sure that's just as fast, if not faster, to install.
Not sure how it could be faster, the core install shouldn't include Hyper-V role, so you'd have to add that, where the install of Hyper-V directly puts everything in at one time, with really no options during install.
-
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
It may have made sense to spin up Hyper-V in the past because a full standard server install takes much longer, but with the 2016 core server option, I'm sure that's just as fast, if not faster, to install.
But that was never the issue. The issue is and has always been licensing incumbrance, which doesn't change with core.
-
why though?? just install a linux distro with samba?
-
@stuartjordan said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
why though?? just install a linux distro with samba?
SMB 3
-
@scottalanmiller said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@stuartjordan said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
why though?? just install a linux distro with samba?
SMB 3
OK - but in this case is that really needed? Unless you're using this Hyper-V install as a storage repo for VM HDDs, right?
-
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@scottalanmiller said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@stuartjordan said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
why though?? just install a linux distro with samba?
SMB 3
OK - but in this case is that really needed? Unless you're using this Hyper-V install as a storage repo for VM HDDs, right?
Windows SMB servers have a lot of advantages. There isn't just one use case for it.
-
What is the "but in this case" here? What's the case?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
What is the "but in this case" here? What's the case?
That's actually a good question - what is the case for doing this in the first place? I assumed it was to use as a ISO storage place, but I could be mistaken.
-
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@scottalanmiller said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
What is the "but in this case" here? What's the case?
That's actually a good question - what is the case for doing this in the first place? I assumed it was to use as a ISO storage place, but I could be mistaken.
It's just a generic "building a file server" as far as I know. So any number of potential use cases.
-
But if Microsoft states this is against TOS, is there any point?
-
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
-
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
Very true. Starwind isn't a company known for this sort of pointless exercise.
-
@travisdh1 said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
Very true. Starwind isn't a company known for this sort of pointless exercise.
What do you mean by that?
I absolutely disagree on anything like "We should not talk about that". In IT industry it's called "security thru the obscurity". Banning meth or nitroglycerine cooking books won't stop people from producing them. Real exercise is evangelization and telling something "Yes, you can do that but it's a bad idea and here's why" rather then telling nothing and just waiting for somebody to try. IMHO of course.
P.S. #$%# I'm thinking about just taking the whole thing down :((((((((((
-
@kooler I don't think there is any need to take it down, It is a good read and interesting Idea, for obvious reasons it just wouldn't be practical In a production environment, I think that's what everyone is meaning. Thank you for taking the time in posting the article.
-
I agree - it's already written, and knowledge is good for it's own sake.
But, I do wonder - what was the purpose in writing it?
Using your meth example, if you're evangelizing against meth, you definitely don't make a book explaining how to make it. So with that in mind, it's not bad that the explanation/write-up exists, it just seems odd to come from a source like StarWinds.
The use of this in production would require a tied license, but one of the main goals of Hyper-V Server is a lack of license requirement. Even in a lab setup, is this the way you'd really want someone to set it up? I lean for the side of No, if for no other reason than to give some person the crazy idea that this would be OK in production because they saw it in a lab (cause ya know that never happens
) -
@kooler said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@travisdh1 said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@bnrstnr said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
@dashrender it's faster to install core because the entire objective of the guide was an SMB server, not a hyper-v server.
Licensing isn't the issue either as they state this is for testing purposes, and that it is, in fact, against TOS. So use the 180 day free trial for testing purposes and spin up a VM of server core for your SMB server.
The whole hyper-v thing makes zero sense whatsoever.
Very true. Starwind isn't a company known for this sort of pointless exercise.
What do you mean by that?
I absolutely disagree on anything like "We should not talk about that". In IT industry it's called "security thru the obscurity". Banning meth or nitroglycerine cooking books won't stop people from producing them. Real exercise is evangelization and telling something "Yes, you can do that but it's a bad idea and here's why" rather then telling nothing and just waiting for somebody to try. IMHO of course.
P.S. #$%# I'm thinking about just taking the whole thing down :((((((((((
You have the warning there. If someone wants to do it in production and gets slapped my MS, it's on them. You shouldn't even need the warning there because it's not your responsibility to make sure people use Microsoft licenses appropriately.
Keep it up.
-
@dashrender said in Creating a free SMB 3.0 file server on Hyper-V 2016. Part 1: Installation and configuration:
Using your meth example, if you're evangelizing against meth, you definitely don't make a book explaining how to make it.
I don't agree with this premise. I make guides on things I wouldn't do all the time. There isn't an association like you are feeling between promoting one practice and documenting another. I think you are falsely seeing documentation as evangelization which is totally untrue. If that's what you are sensing, then that is the same trick that marketers use to make you think that they said something when they didn't actually say it. This article is purely information, it doesn't suggest that you use it in any specific way. That would be reading into it.
