Vmware esxi runs Mikrotik as a vm but as discussed in some threads it has performance issues since vmware-tools is not installable to Mikrotik.

May be a vmware-tools package produced by Mikrotik can be easily deployed. We can have Routeros inside the esxi/esx, close to native performance.

I agree!
Specially a driver for VMXNET3 is needed!
Thanks

in v6 it can be here, with upgreded Kernel

found in Linux kernels: 2.6.32–2.6.39, 3.0–3.4, 3.5-rc+HEAD

In the test RB1100Ahx2 noticed that when updating the queue was not simple and that the correct markings in queue tree no longer an option in global-and global-out, only global.

in v6 it can be here, with upgreded Kernel

found in Linux kernels: 2.6.32–2.6.39, 3.0–3.4, 3.5-rc+HEAD

Can't be right, 5.0rc1 is based on linux-2.6.35 unless MT just wont compile it in

Vmware esxi runs Mikrotik as a vm but as discussed in some threads it has performance issues since vmware-tools is not installable to Mikrotik.

May be a vmware-tools package produced by Mikrotik can be easily deployed. We can have Routeros inside the esxi/esx, close to native performance.

Really interested!!!!! +1!!!

Vmware esxi runs Mikrotik as a vm but as discussed in some threads it has performance issues since vmware-tools is not installable to Mikrotik.

May be a vmware-tools package produced by Mikrotik can be easily deployed. We can have Routeros inside the esxi/esx, close to native performance.

Really interested!!!!! +1!!!

+1

+1 for vmware-tools

xenserver tools too
+1

I would guess that MT isn't keen on supporting or improving VM performance at all, It introduces the abilty to clone the HDD without triggering a new license key, If they were to offer great support/speed with VM's they would need to figure a way to lock down the licence key's better than HDD image backed

That reason crossed my mind too. But on second thought, does it really make sense? Current RouterOS already works with VMware. And if you buy one licence, there's nothing except your honesty preventing you from making a thousand clones with it. What would change if RouterOS supported virtualization a little better? Well, people would tend to use it more, obviously. Both paying and non-paying ones. Which still sounds like MikroTik's victory to me.

It would give them recogniztion, market share and visibility.

But it would violate someones religious believes, so it wont't happen.

And it HAS to be religious believes, if you look at the arguments for not supporting it.

it would be same problems as with XEN where previously. Either start developing for them, or you end up with a feature that is not usable. And your customers rely on the feature. Not long ago it took several month for vmware to update "virtual hardware" to be compatible with intel released e1000 driver. On the other hand - KVM has its set of drivers that just works and are fully supported by Linux kernel devs.

ubuntu has an open-vm-tools package. Mikrotik can have it too. As more than a 100 licenses purchased and 3 CCR's running in my network, i request vm-tools.npk

+1 for VMware tools as well. I purchased a license to stand alone run Usermanager and its performance isn't as good as it could be.

Yes please, vmxnet3 is already in linux kernel, please include (enable) it also in mikrotik. And there are open vmware tools
https://github.com/vmware/open-vm-tools

+1 vote! Would be great a feature!

Unfortunately, all virtual features are being added to Cloud Hosted Router http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=98981