Hyper-V Server 2012 (free edition) and UCS

I am trying to find out if the free standalone edition of Microsoft Hyper-V Server 2012 is compatible and supported to run on Cisco UCS B- series servers, specifically B200M3? if anyone can share their experience with Hyper-V and UCS that would be greatly appreciated.  

Thank you

While we have not produced a CVD for such a configuration, there is absolutely no reason for it not to work.  In fact, I'm in the process of building out a configuration with Hyper-V Server 2012 R2 on B200M3s right now and have not run into any sort of issue.

Hyper-V Server is basically a distribution of a pre-configured Windows Server  2012 R2 Core installation with all roles except Hyper-V removed and added utility, sconfig, to help configure the basic environment.  In other words, with Windows Server Core you can install additional roles such as file services or web services.  In Hyper-V Server, you cannot install any of those roles, but the important features, such as Failover Clustering, are still available.  The installation has also been truncated so that it will automatically install the Hyper-V role without the need to select it.

Otherwise, remote management with Windows RSAT tools and PowerShell works exactly the same to a Hyper-V Server installation as it does to a Windows Server Standard or Datacenter installation.

If you want to pursue this, feel free to contact me.  I've been developing a number of PowerShell scripts to make the configuration a little easier.  So many Windows administrators are very capable with the management GUIs, but those do not exist on Hyper-V Server.  Most capabilities are still possible from the management GUIs, but they have to be run from another workstation or server, and some of them have some anomalies.

Thank you Timothy for the update and for the additional information.

Best Regards,

Hi Timothy,

I would be really interested in your setup, as I'm facing some issues installing Hyper-V 2012R2 core free edition on a B230M2 with a VIC 1280 (which should be fully supported according to the compatibility matrix).

Once I load the driver manually during the installation process, I can see my LUN (FC boot from SAN): one disk is online and the other three are offline. So far so good, as there is no MPIO installed.

But I always get the error "cannot create a new partition or locate an existing one". Even if I try to create and format it.

Suggestions are welcome.

Simone

Ensure the zoning and masking are presenting only the single path presented by the Primary boot policy.  By this I mean that your boot policy will have both Primary and Secondary (FC-1 and FC-2) and each will have primary and secondary WWNs to the storage, but the zone/mask should only be presenting the Primary/primary.

tim

Hi Timothy,

thank you so much for your quick answer!

I did a test in the mean time and found out with my great surprise that using the 2012R2 DVD and selecting Standard Core Version, install works.

And I didn't change anything else than the iso :S

BTW, I'm on 2.1(3a) firmware but using 2.1(3b) iso for drivers, as W2K12R2 is only there.

Simone

NB: Just noticed that on the 2.1(3b) iso for drivers, there is even the M81KR driver for W2K12R2 even if it's not supported on the public compatibility matrix.

Interesting.  That should not have made any difference.  Hyper-V Server is a stripped down installation of Windows Server core.  It comes preconfigured to automatically install just the Hyper-V role, and all other roles are removed from the installation media.  Otherwise, it would basically be the same as a core installation of Windows Server Standard or Datacenter.  (The only difference between Standard and Datacenter are the virtualization rights that come with the license.)  It runs the exact same version of Hyper-V, and the kernel of all three is exactly the same.

In regards to the drivers, I forget when, but I believe we made a switch a while ago so that the same driver is used for M81KR, 1240, and 1280.  Even though they have separate directories on the driver ISO, if you look at the files you will see the same files.  You should be using the latest drivers for Windows - 2.2.1.

Quick hint:  During the installation process when you select the storage drivers for installation, you can also select the NIC drivers.  I know a lot of the instructions show a procedure to cycle through each NIC and install the driver manually after the installation is comple.  Installing the driver during the during the installation removes that manual step as it will automatically recognize all NICs during the installation.  Or, if you prefer to load the NIC drivers after you complete the OS installation, you can issue a single command to load the driver for all NICs.  From a command prompt issue this command:

pnputil -i -a  <path>\<driver>.inf

This is the plug-n-play utility.  Point it to the location in your Cisco driver media where the .inf file resides, and it will install the driver and all NICs will get associated with the driver files.  Much faster than the older methods in some earlier documents.

tim

Hi Timothy,

final update on the topic.

I created an updated ISO using "Windows 8.1 ADK" and injecting both eNIC and fNIC drivers.

Still same issue using the free Hyper-V 2012R2 iso image.

Works fine using the full Windows 2012R2 iso.

I would say Cisco should test and advertise customers about the issue.

Simone

Hi,

just to be as clear as possibile. This is the error I receive:

I noticed that the compatibility matrix operating system notes says:

"Note 18: All variations of OS are supported for this version, including Windows Server Core, Full and Hyper-V Standalone"

so I'm going to open a TAC to see where the problem lies.

Simone

Hi,

TAC #629058627.

Simone

Very strange.  I didn't change anything in my environment.  Using the exact same UCS/Nexus/server configuration, I installed Hyper-V Server and then turned around and installed Windows Server.  Followed the same process of installing drivers during installation instead of injecting them into the image, but injecting them just saves some manual steps during installation.

Every time I have seen the error you show, it was because I had a mistake in my zone/mask configuration.  But if you were using the exact same configuration each time, just changing the installation media, that is quite strange.  If using the same configuration but different media was causing an error, I would attempt another download of the media that is faulting just to eliminate the possibility that something strange happened in the download.

Hi Timothy,

injecting the driver just avoids swapping between two iso images via VirtualMedia page on KVM.

Was more a test to make sure timing was not THE issue.

Simone

Understand about the swapping.  The only thing one needs to be concerned about swapping is that the Windows ISO has been re-inserted before clicking refresh on the screen showing the available volumes.  That would be another reason that would get a message - not sure if it would be the same as what you got.

Last guess on my part would be media corruption.  As I say, I did the same without any difficulties at all, so I know it works.

tim

Hi again Timothy,

I'm sure it works for you, but unfortunately not for me.

The file name is "9600.16384.WINBLUE_RTM.130821-1623_X64FRE_SERVERHYPERCORE_EN-US-IRM_SHV_X64FRE_EN-US_DV5.ISO" downloaded from Download Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.

Could you confirm you are using the same media please ?

I bet it's more relatd to some parameters in the BIOS than the ISO as the latest is mounted fine by 3 different softwares, check is passed, Windows ADK works fine and the same exact issue happens with the newly build ISO image after injecting drivers.

Thank you for your time and support.

Simone

Hi Timothy,

would you be so kind to check your media name for me ?

Thank you in advance.

Simone

That version was a pre-release version.  You should be using the released version which you download from here - Download Hyper-V Server 2012 R2

Hi Timothy,

are you sure ?

The link you suggested is the same I posted. Plus the iso name says "RTM".

Can you post your iso full file name please ?

Thx

Simone

Sorry, I was just looking at the name of the file - I overlooked your link.  The name is the way Microsoft was naming files during the early releases, so I jumped to an incorrect conclusion.  I didn't realize they kept the same naming convention for the media from their download site.  The copy I used during my installations was from MSDN - en_microsoft_hyper-v_server_2012_r2_x64_dvd_2708236.iso dated from September, 2013.

When I get a chance, I will try the version from the download site instead of the MSDN version.

Timothy,

do you mind doing a sha1/md5 check on your ISO ?

mine are:

SHA1: "99829e03eb090251612673bf57c4d064049d067a"

MD5: "9c9e0d82cb6301a4b88fd2f4c35caf80"

If they differ, can you compare the content ? I would say something is different between MSDN media and the free download.

Thank you.

Simone

Yes, they are different, and that does not surprise.  MSDN media is 'tagged' as MSDN media, so files found there will almost always be 'different'.  Also, they may get updated with patches at different times - this is something new that Microsoft has implemented.  Whereas in the past you would download media and have to apply all patches that had been released since the release of the product, they are now creating 'update rollups' and applying those to download media.  I know they are doing this in MSDN distributions.  I do not know if they are doing the same on the Microsoft download site.

As I say, when I get a chance, I will retry with the download versus MSDN media.

Timothy,

thank you very much.

I was aware of the MSDN media updates, but I was hoping they did the same for the freely downloadable iso.

If this will be proved to the the culprit, then Cisco should update OS notes for compatibility.

Interesting is that I have a SPLA contract with Microsoft, but cannot have that iso (as it's a free download, so the link takes to the public site).

Have a nice day.

Simone

Simone,

I took some time to go back and try again with the public download copy instead of MSDN media.  I had no issues.  Works fine.

You can ignore the message about not enough space.  That's a holdover from when Microsoft required there to be enough space on the disk for a full memory dump.  They have changed that requirement, so this warning message can be safely ignored.

The difference between what I am doing and what you are doing is that you are not using the latest drivers.  I am using 2.2.1, and you stated you are using 2.1.3b.  As I noted in an earlier post, you should be using the latest drivers.  Rule of thumb for dealing with storage or networking issues is to always ensure you have the latest version of the driver, unless you know for a fact that an earlier version is required.  In this case, I forget when we introduced support for 2012 R2 - I'd have to go back to the release notes to find out.  From our different experiences, it appears that it was between 2.1 and 2.2.

Hi Timothy,

thank you very much for time spent testing. I appreciate it!

I'll retest with updated drivers. Even if looking at UCS Manager Interoperability Utility, notes say:

Adapter Driver   = 2.3.0.20 (FNIC) / 2.3.0.10 (ENIC)

Adapter Firmware = 2.1(3)

and fnic2k12.inf from ucs-bxxx-drivers.2.1.3b.iso says:

Signature   = "$WINDOWS NT$"

CatalogFile = fnic2k12.cat

DriverVer   = 10/17/2013,2.3.0.20

so I should be in the correct support matrixx ;-)

Simone

Hi Timothy,

finally got the iso from MSDN: same issue (bte, the md5/sha12 is the same as the public available).

Then I checked with updated drivers, even if they are not in support matrix: same issue.

What I finally did is the suggestion that came from the SR: removed the zoning to make the blade see only 1 path. And it worked like a charm !!!

Was not enough to change the boot policy like you suggested from the beginning, dunno why.

And dunno why, if using multiple paths, works with full Windows Server and not with Hyper-V Server.

Anyway, it's all good now.

Thank you for your support and time.

Simone

"What I finally did is the suggestion that came from the SR: removed the zoning to make the blade see only 1 path. And it worked like a charm !!!"

Yes, that is a basic requirement.  That is documented in every CVD that is published for building Windows images.  From the way I was reading the description of your environment, I was under the assumption that you were presenting multiple disks to the server.  I did not read it as you having all paths defined to a single LUN.

Glad you found the issue.

tim