@JaredBusch said in question on veeam backup:

Install Windows 10 on the bare metal and just run Veeam on it.

Do not add the Hyper-V roll. there is no point to it and you will not be able to back it up if you only have a Veeam license for 2 hosts anyway.

I typically have a left over desktop or something that I use to run Veeam itself, with the backup storage being a NAS.

But in the situation that I have left over server hardware with zero need for Virtualization of it, I would just install Veeam there. I would also buy a Windows 10 license for it instead of pay for a Server 2016 license.

The OS doens't matter to Veeam beyond being Windows.

Backup the Veeam config to a USB drive or something in case the thing pukes and you need to set it all back up.

the only thing that windows 10 doesn't have is deduplication, which is why veeam is currently running in server 2012r2

I am not decided yet on purchasing server 2016 (or 2019). Part of me does not want to invest in those unless I've decided to move ahead with our current ERP and current file server and not change anything, just update the versions of server and SQL. But If I can figure out something else in the next year or two, I may just stick with the server 2012r2 that I am currently good on licensing for.

@scottalanmiller said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

@PhlipElder said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

@NerdyDad said in question on veeam backup:

Umm, yeah. There is a lot better answer here. Install Hyper-V Server 2016 from ISO instead of wasting the license.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/evaluate-hyper-v-server-2016

Once Hyper-V is installed on all 3 hosts, either run Veeam B&R by itself on a server or run it in conjunction with another server that isn't being fully utilized.

Also, why aren't you clustering your hosts together and load balancing your VMs across all 3 hosts? Can they not see the same storage or something?

I am pretty sure that what I am trying to do requires a windows license. Its a dubious grey area at best as to if veeam requires a license or not. From what I have found so far, the consensus seems to be that veeam does not require a license if veeam is backing up VM's from that host. It is less clear when veeam is backing up VM's from a completely different host.

I do not need a cluster. My existing two hosts at this site are old and are going into semi-retirement such as just running veeam. My storage is being completely redone for this project.

Guest licensing is always based on the host. If VM is running in a Windows Server VM then the host needs at least one Server Standard license. That particular license allows for two guests. So, Veeam in one guest and a secondary DC in the other. Or, whatever the need may be.

I just took another look at my current server count. If I run the DC for this site on the backup host, that will give me a pair, and 4 on the production host vs 5:1. So that might be a good reason to do it, but it would require me to license the host for veeam to backup that DC, which is roughly the same cost as server. It feels like 6 one way and 1/2 dozen the other.

You never take backups of more than one DC in your environment.

So the question of veeam licenses would be do I backup the DC at the HQ, or the DC at my branch. I've currently got two hosts worth of veeam licenses. I won't have anything besides the DC to backup at the branch with my current plan, so there really isn't anything there to help decide.

@PhlipElder said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

@NerdyDad said in question on veeam backup:

Umm, yeah. There is a lot better answer here. Install Hyper-V Server 2016 from ISO instead of wasting the license.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/evaluate-hyper-v-server-2016

Once Hyper-V is installed on all 3 hosts, either run Veeam B&R by itself on a server or run it in conjunction with another server that isn't being fully utilized.

Also, why aren't you clustering your hosts together and load balancing your VMs across all 3 hosts? Can they not see the same storage or something?

I am pretty sure that what I am trying to do requires a windows license. Its a dubious grey area at best as to if veeam requires a license or not. From what I have found so far, the consensus seems to be that veeam does not require a license if veeam is backing up VM's from that host. It is less clear when veeam is backing up VM's from a completely different host.

I do not need a cluster. My existing two hosts at this site are old and are going into semi-retirement such as just running veeam. My storage is being completely redone for this project.

Guest licensing is always based on the host. If VM is running in a Windows Server VM then the host needs at least one Server Standard license. That particular license allows for two guests. So, Veeam in one guest and a secondary DC in the other. Or, whatever the need may be.

I just took another look at my current server count. If I run the DC for this site on the backup host, that will give me a pair, and 4 on the production host vs 5:1. So that might be a good reason to do it, but it would require me to license the host for veeam to backup that DC, which is roughly the same cost as server. It feels like 6 one way and 1/2 dozen the other.

@scottalanmiller said in question on veeam backup:

@Dashrender said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

@NerdyDad said in question on veeam backup:

Veeam licensing is based on the host processors for the guests that you are wanting to backup.

The local storage. Is that based on other factors or just based on Veeam?

we are strictly talking windows licensing. I have already cleared up the veeam licensing. The storage is local to keep the speed up. This host will have a 10G network to backup the production host. but all the secondary copies of the backups are all at 1G

If Windows licensing is the only thing we're talking about - then yes, you will need a Windows license assigned to the Veeam server (host).

It's about deployment location... do the "host" VM, or a "guest" VM. Dom0 vs DomU in Xen terms.

I guess that is the way I was trying to put it. Which is better, Dom0 or DomU? It seems like the portability of DomU is the real benefit of that location, but is there any offsetting benefit from Dom0?

@Dashrender said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

@Dashrender said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

I am pretty sure that what I am trying to do requires a windows license. Its a dubious grey area at best as to if veeam requires a license or not. From what I have found so far, the consensus seems to be that veeam does not require a license if veeam is backing up VM's from that host. It is less clear when veeam is backing up VM's from a completely different host.

And you can only install Veeam into a full windows environment, I assume. In otherwords, I don't think you can install Veeam into Hyper-V Core.

So installing Windows Server 2016 on the hardware, then enabling Hyper-V service, still requires a license, even with zero VMs running.

that's my point.

I'm sorry - what was your point? or question?

My point was the a windows license is required either way. My question is, because a license is required either way, which is the prefered way, VM or physical?

@NerdyDad said in question on veeam backup:

Veeam licensing is based on the host processors for the guests that you are wanting to backup.

The local storage. Is that based on other factors or just based on Veeam?

we are strictly talking windows licensing. I have already cleared up the veeam licensing. The storage is local to keep the speed up. This host will have a 10G network to backup the production host. but all the secondary copies of the backups are all at 1G

@Dashrender said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

I am pretty sure that what I am trying to do requires a windows license. Its a dubious grey area at best as to if veeam requires a license or not. From what I have found so far, the consensus seems to be that veeam does not require a license if veeam is backing up VM's from that host. It is less clear when veeam is backing up VM's from a completely different host.

And you can only install Veeam into a full windows environment, I assume. In otherwords, I don't think you can install Veeam into Hyper-V Core.

So installing Windows Server 2016 on the hardware, then enabling Hyper-V service, still requires a license, even with zero VMs running.

that's my point.

@Dashrender said in question on veeam backup:

For the backup host only:

Install Hyper-V Core on the hardware - you never use Hyper-V as a role unless something forces you to. - no license required

Create VM under Hyper-V, install Windows server 2016, install Veeam - this requires a Windows Server license.

This solution makes it VERY easy to move the Veeam install to another server if needed/desired.

yes, but the primary storage for veeam will also be local to this host. The only reason I could see to move that VM would be because something was wrong with the host, in which case there is also something wrong with veeams primary storage. Therefore, moving the VM is a moot point.

@NerdyDad said in question on veeam backup:

You are taking resources away from your hypervisor

Under nominal conditions, there will be no load on this hypervisor. The only thing this host has to do is run veeam.

@NerdyDad said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue If you run Hyper-V core (which is what I recommend), then you can't run Veeam on it. It would have to be run on a VM. Also, if you install MS Server 2016 w/ Hyper-V as a role (which is not what I would suggest), then I would not suggest installing Veeam on the host directly. You are taking resources away from your hypervisor and what if your host 3 goes down? There goes all of your backups too.

I dont see your point. Your first part is just saying the same thing as my original question. I think you are misunderstanding what I am trying to achieve here. What if any single non HA resource goes down? Then it is down and must be brought back up. I dont see the problem here. I will also have more than one copy of the backup files themselves, at least 3 or 4 including offsite.

@NerdyDad said in question on veeam backup:

Umm, yeah. There is a lot better answer here. Install Hyper-V Server 2016 from ISO instead of wasting the license.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/evalcenter/evaluate-hyper-v-server-2016

Once Hyper-V is installed on all 3 hosts, either run Veeam B&R by itself on a server or run it in conjunction with another server that isn't being fully utilized.

Also, why aren't you clustering your hosts together and load balancing your VMs across all 3 hosts? Can they not see the same storage or something?

I am pretty sure that what I am trying to do requires a windows license. Its a dubious grey area at best as to if veeam requires a license or not. From what I have found so far, the consensus seems to be that veeam does not require a license if veeam is backing up VM's from that host. It is less clear when veeam is backing up VM's from a completely different host.

I do not need a cluster. My existing two hosts at this site are old and are going into semi-retirement such as just running veeam. My storage is being completely redone for this project.

@PhlipElder said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

@PhlipElder said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

As a result of changing all my setup, I am going to have three hosts at my HQ site, all running Hyper-V. Host A will be new and basically carry the entire production load. Host B is existing and will be running empty, and only used as a restore point in case host A goes down. Host C is also existing, but will be running only veeam. Currently I am on ESXi and veeam is running in a server 2012r2 VM. My question is, when everything is switched over and veeam is now the only thing running on host C under Hyper-V, should I run that inside a VM on Hyper-V core, or just install Server on the bare metal and run veeam from that?

The VM route obviously consumes a license, and really a pair of them. Running the server with Hyper-V role seems a little more dubious from a licensing standpoint. I am not sure if there could be a clear answer that was agreed upon since veeam would be "supporting Hyper-V", but the hosts Hyper-V it would be supporting would be a different host. I am also currently using dedupe within windows server, which is a nice feature. I am not sure how the veeam dedupe compares.

If we assume the both uses consume a windows server license, which would you prefer and why?

We'd keep the VM leaving the host resources available for any spot workloads or even lab workloads.

but I can do that both ways since there will be hyper V both ways.

I'm not sure I understand.

The only place bare metal makes any real sense anymore, IMNSHO, is in high transaction workloads like SQL. Otherwise, keep the guest and utilize the resources for other projects.

This host will either be Hyper-V core, or windows server with Hyper-V role. Either way I can run Hyper-V VM's on it. The question is just where do I install veeam?

@PhlipElder said in question on veeam backup:

@Donahue said in question on veeam backup:

As a result of changing all my setup, I am going to have three hosts at my HQ site, all running Hyper-V. Host A will be new and basically carry the entire production load. Host B is existing and will be running empty, and only used as a restore point in case host A goes down. Host C is also existing, but will be running only veeam. Currently I am on ESXi and veeam is running in a server 2012r2 VM. My question is, when everything is switched over and veeam is now the only thing running on host C under Hyper-V, should I run that inside a VM on Hyper-V core, or just install Server on the bare metal and run veeam from that?

The VM route obviously consumes a license, and really a pair of them. Running the server with Hyper-V role seems a little more dubious from a licensing standpoint. I am not sure if there could be a clear answer that was agreed upon since veeam would be "supporting Hyper-V", but the hosts Hyper-V it would be supporting would be a different host. I am also currently using dedupe within windows server, which is a nice feature. I am not sure how the veeam dedupe compares.

If we assume the both uses consume a windows server license, which would you prefer and why?

We'd keep the VM leaving the host resources available for any spot workloads or even lab workloads.

but I can do that both ways since there will be hyper V both ways.

also, I just want to clarify. People are using the term "DC with integrated DNS". I am thinking of it as DC with DNS role. Are talking about the same thing?

its very possible that my issue could have been both DC 1 and DC 2 being unavilable and the clients flipping to DNS2 which is a public DNS, in which case that could be why my internal resources were not able to be found at that time. We had some network issues around the same time too, maybe they overlapped and I just didn't put 2+2 together.

As a result of changing all my setup, I am going to have three hosts at my HQ site, all running Hyper-V. Host A will be new and basically carry the entire production load. Host B is existing and will be running empty, and only used as a restore point in case host A goes down. Host C is also existing, but will be running only veeam. Currently I am on ESXi and veeam is running in a server 2012r2 VM. My question is, when everything is switched over and veeam is now the only thing running on host C under Hyper-V, should I run that inside a VM on Hyper-V core, or just install Server on the bare metal and run veeam from that?

The VM route obviously consumes a license, and really a pair of them. Running the server with Hyper-V role seems a little more dubious from a licensing standpoint. I am not sure if there could be a clear answer that was agreed upon since veeam would be "supporting Hyper-V", but the hosts Hyper-V it would be supporting would be a different host. I am also currently using dedupe within windows server, which is a nice feature. I am not sure how the veeam dedupe compares.

If we assume the both uses consume a windows server license, which would you prefer and why?

@scottalanmiller said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@Donahue said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@scottalanmiller said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@Dashrender said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@scottalanmiller said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@Donahue said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@scottalanmiller said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@Donahue said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

is there a system that can display tags in a way that would look like folders to the user? Like a way to change your view to see the files organized by tag 2 instead of tag 1? I use this perspective change all the time in SQL, and I would love something equivalent in a file system using tags.

There is a way to write a system to do that, but no one makes one today.

well get on that @scottalanmiller, the world is apparently waiting

I guess so! Time to reinvent the local filesystem abstraction!

It really is needed.

Agreed... though - is there any money in it?

It would be an open source project, sadly. Sadly meaning, no, not any money in it.

what about fame and recognition?

I already have that

what's +1 more?

@scottalanmiller said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@Dashrender said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@scottalanmiller said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@Donahue said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@scottalanmiller said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

@Donahue said in I have to change cloud drive service yet again:

is there a system that can display tags in a way that would look like folders to the user? Like a way to change your view to see the files organized by tag 2 instead of tag 1? I use this perspective change all the time in SQL, and I would love something equivalent in a file system using tags.

There is a way to write a system to do that, but no one makes one today.

well get on that @scottalanmiller, the world is apparently waiting

I guess so! Time to reinvent the local filesystem abstraction!

It really is needed.

Agreed... though - is there any money in it?

It would be an open source project, sadly. Sadly meaning, no, not any money in it.

what about fame and recognition?

@scottalanmiller said in DNS Update Issue:

@Donahue said in DNS Update Issue:

right, but I wonder if my branch DC should be pointing to the HQ DC, or just going straight to external?

Branch DC's DNS should point first to the loopback, then to the HQ DNS. That way to minimize WAN traffic, and maximize performance.

in the NIC settings, correct? Should HQ secondarily point to branch?