- Replica: We have Replica running in our NY & London datacenters and can (and on a couple of occasions, have) fail over servers quickly and cleanly. Failback also worked like a charm.
- Cost: It’s no secret that H-V is much less expensive than VMware; we are saving many thousands a year in licensing & support. It also sets up for future costs savings as the business grows.
- Stability: Since we implemented the H-V solution we have reported outstanding uptimes.
Technology Consultant, ASEAN at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Hyper-V 2012 R2 vs. VMware vSphere 5.5
I was won with Hyper-V 2012R2 recently and the table below based on customer RFP (edited). This articles all about technical, there is not related with TCO/ROI, licensing cost, “political”, etc. Another to noted is the Windows Server 2012 licenses is based on 2 socket CPU, meanwhile VMware vSphere is based on 1 socket CPU. With Windows 2012R2 Datacenter, you will eligible to have unlimited Guest OS licenses.
Also System Center 2012R2 licenses based on 2 socket CPU.
Enjoy it, and let me know if I missed something or need some updated.
| Requirements | Hyper-V 2012R2 | VMware vSphere 5.5 |
|
Host Server Hardware Requirements • 32 Logical CPUs minimum • 128GB RAM or more |
Support: • 320 Logical Processor • 4TB RAM |
Support: • 320 Logical Processor • 4TB RAM |
|
VM Guest Hardware Specification • Up to 16vCPUs • Up to 64GB RAM • At least support for 2 vNICs • Virtual CPU per Host • Virtual Hard disk support for up to 10TB |
Support: • 64vCPUs • 1TB RAM • 12 vNIC supported • 2048 vCPU per Host • 64TB Virtual Disk |
Support: • 64vCPUs • 1TB RAM • 10 vNIC supported • 512 vCPU per Host • 62TB Virtual Disk |
|
Host clustering Support: • Support for at least 8 nodes • Support for at least 90 running VMs or more • VM Replication technology to enable DR scenarios |
Support: • 64 nodes per Cluster • 8,000 VMs per Cluster • Hyper-V Replica |
Support: • 32 nodes per Cluster • 4,000 VMs per Cluster • vSphere Replication |
| • VM Failover priority and startup priority | • YES | • YES |
| • Concurrent based migration without downtime of VMs | Live Migration with unlimited VMs | vMotion, 4VM (1GbE) and 10VM (10GbE) per Host |
| • Storage migration without downtime of VMs | Live Storage Migration | Storage vMotion |
| • No shared storage based migration without downtime of VMs | Shared Nothing Live Migration | vMotion |
| • High Availability of VMs | Windows Server Failover Cluster | VMware HA |
| • Dynamic Workload balancing across host cluster | • Hyper-V High Availability | • VMware DRS |
| • Live merge of VM snapshots | • Intelligent Placement with System Center VMM | • Center Snapshot Manager |
| • Supported with Hyper-V Backup | • Supported with vSphere Data Protection | |
| Support for VM workload migration without downtime, VM workload storage migration without downtime and host clustering features | Intelligent Placement (VMM) for VM workload without downtime. And Storage Tiering by Windows Server 2012R2 for Storage Workload. | DRS and Storage DRS |
| Support for VM Templates and automated VM creation of Windows Server OS workloads | YES | YES |
| Support for managing multi Hypervisors – preferably VMware and Hyper-V | System Center 2012R2 support for managing multi hypervisor (Hyper-V, VMware and XenServer) | vCenter vCAC |
| Granular administration model | Supported with Windows Server 2012R2 Active Directory | Supported with Windows Server 2012R2 Active Directory |
| Monitoring and alerting of virtual infrastructure coving all components from the hardware level to the Hypervisor to the running VMs, VM OS health and Applications monitoring | Supported with System Center 2012R2 | vCenter Operations Manager |
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
System Architect at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Microsoft Hyper-V 3.0 from a vSphere lover's perspective.
Microsoft is making claims that Windows Hyper-V Server 2012 is the best virtualization platform for Windows. I have to say that they have caught my interest with Windows Server 2012, Hyper-V version 3 and Systems Center Virtual Machine Manager (SCVMM) 2012. So I have been hard at work getting deep into the products, first by updating all my lab systems. Unfortunately Windows Server 2012 is not in general release yet so all my setup and testing is being done with the release candidate and/or technical preview software. In saying this, you can’t really compare the software solutions to the current release versions of VMware vSphere, vCenter Server, etc as I may tend to do. And if you don’t know, VMWorld 2012 is right around the corner and I expect there to be additional product updates. Especially since VMware has been an industry leader and innovator in this space for many years now.
Let’s skip past the details of the features that one or the other offers and outline my findings and my opinions of Hyper-V. The first thing most people will ask is whether Hyper-V better than vSphere' Well the answer is “Yes” and “No”. I would still say that I like vSphere better but that’s because I’m a bit bias having used it for so long. But I do see the great potential that is to be had by implementing Hyper-V and System Center VMM, especially for enterprise clients that are primarily using Microsoft Windows Server along with System Center solutions.
Here’s what I think so far about what Microsoft is bringing to bare for virtualization.
CONS:
- I found Hyper-V to be a bit more complex to configure some of the features that vSphere seems to make really simple like High Availability (HA) which requires the Failover Clustering feature.
- There are features that I haven’t found yet in Hyper-V like Enhanced vMotion to aid in dong Live Migrations between different processor families.
- I did not see a comparable solution to Distributed Resource Scheduler (DRS) or Storage DRS. These are two features that yield great returns by automatically balancing VM workloads across multiple host resources using vMotion and Storage vMotion.
- There’s a lot going on with SCVMM which mean you have a bit to wrap your head around. But some may say the same thing about vCenter.
PROS:
- My first Pro is the last Con. There is a lot going on with SCVMM. While it was a little overwhelming once you do get your head wrap around it you’ll see that you can do more than just server virtualization. You can build a private cloud with self service and all. VMware offers vCloud Director which is a separate solution with additional licensing and cost.
- With Datacenter Edition of Windows Server gives you can virtualize an unlimited number of virtual machines. This also includes the virtual machines operating system licenses if your running Windows Server. VMware can’t even offer that since Microsoft owns the OS.
- If your already licensed to use System Center 2012 you will get SCVMM and more at no additional cost. This is because Microsoft has decided to bundle many of the management products and change their licensing model. More details can be found here. If you have a previous version of the management software an upgrade path could be available and worth it giving the additional software you’ll gain.
- Oh and I can’t forget the fact that SCVMM will let you use Hyper-V, vSphere, and Citrix virtualization host servers as platforms to build on. This is not available with vCenter since it only supports managing VMware virtualization hosts.
The new version of Windows Hyper-V does not have 100% feature parity with VMware vSphere 5 and vCenter combo but you get so much those additional features might not matter much. Microsoft is clearly going to give VMware some serious competition when it’s released.
Microsoft Hyper-V 3.0 from a vSphere lovers perspective. originally appeared on theHyperadvisor by Antone Heyward
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
kapilmalik1983 ... there are different versions and their prices.... if you go with unlimited VMs then it will cost you around 5000 UDS
Buyer's Guide
Hyper-V
January 2026
Learn what your peers think about Hyper-V. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Datacenter and Cloud Architect with 1,001-5,000 employees
If you don't have a need for complex apps then Hyper-V is the correct solution to choose
I've used Hyper-V 2012 for 6 months for deployment of new VM's. The speed of the VM's has improved the way we function, although the storage features could use some improvement. Overall, I gave Hyper-V 4 stars although we did encounter issues with deployment and there were times when it was not stable which caused the VM to reboot without notice.
Before implementing Hyper-V, we also evaluated options from VMware. If you don't have a need for complex apps then Hyper-V is the correct solution to choose. We chose to implement in-house and our setup cost was $4,100.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
DO look for an alternative backup software such as Acronis:
www.acronis.com/en-eu/business/backup-advanced/citrix/
Protect your entire Citrix XenServer environment with one-step backups, flexible storage, and ultra-fast data recovery—all managed from one easy-to-use dashboard.
Keeping virtual data safe can be a complex undertaking that demands smart, efficient solutions that simplify rather than complicate critical tasks. Keep it simple with Acronis Backup Advanced—the fastest, most efficient way to protect your entire Citrix XenServer environment.
Full backups. Acronis Backup Advanced combines patented image-based backups with seamless Citrix XenServer integration to capture your entire setup quickly and easily.
Application support. Acronis Backup Advanced includes the ability to capture application data for Microsoft Exchange, SQL Server, Active Directory, and SharePoint running on Citrix XenServer VMs.
Hybrid Protection. For complete peace of mind, Acronis Backup Advanced can create and send multiple backup copies to both local storage and the Acronis cloud—without any additional steps!
Fast, flexible recovery. Our near-instant recovery technology allows you to restore individual files, application data, or an entire VM—all from the same backup! We also offer the flexibility of restoring data to its original location or to an entirely new one (even a completely different hypervisor platform).
All Acronis Backup Advanced products are designed to work as stand-alone solutions, or in combination with each other under one unified management console. This includes Acronis Backup Advanced for Citrix XenServer, which you can seamlessly combine with other Acronis products to create the ideal solution for your specific needs.
Current Version: Acronis Backup Advanced for Citrix XenServer Version 11.5
IT Manager with 51-200 employees
Virtual Networking: VMware vs. Hyper-V
We've been busy building out our new Server 2012/Hyper-V infrastructure in support of our move to all new and shiny Exchange 2013, SharePoint 2013, Lync 2013 and Office 2013 along with our move to Windows 8 on all the client machines. We made the decision to move off VMware ESXi as our virtualization platform and onto Hyper-V as we are first and foremost a Microsoft shop. Server 2012 and Hyper-V now offer a compelling platform for virtualization and, frankly, if we can do what we want to do with products from one vendor rather than multiple vendors then so much the better. Hyper-V is no longer a poor relation to VMware in terms of performance or capabilities and, believe me, I was the most “dyed in the wool” rabid VMware user for many years so I’m not saying this just to toe the company line. I firmly believe that it’s now pretty much a level playing field between VMware and Microsoft.
During our migration we have been learning about the subtle differences between the two platforms and have had to adjust our thinking accordingly. Virtual networking, and specifically “virtual switches”, is one area where we have had to really make a conscious effort to adjust how we look at things and how we configure things. Let me explain …
In both VMware and Hyper-V you have to deal with virtual switching to “bridge” the virtual machines hosted on a virtualization host to your physical network. Both platforms allow you to create virtual switches that act pretty much the same a physical layer 2 switches and both platforms require you to create at least one virtual switch before VM’s can be connected to the outside world. But while the overall concept is the same the execution varies rather a lot between the two platforms.
VMware Virtual Switch
In VMware I can create a virtual switch and attach one or more physical NIC’s to the switch. If I create a virtual switch with 2 NIC’s then the switch would have theoretical throughput of 2Gbps assuming both underlying physical NIC’s were gigabit. When I attach VM’s to the switch the VM’s would route traffic over both NIC’s (in theory). I know in practice that traffic might “ping pong” across the NIC’s as they aren’t actually teamed together (bonded) but the point is the switch provides “bigger” bandwidth than a switch with only one NIC attached. (You can bond NIC’s for switches but that is beyond the scope of this blog.) Think of the switch as providing “load balancing” across the attached NIC’s as well as a certain amount of redundancy as the switch (and the attached VM’s) can survive a component NIC failure and keep connectivity in place. Our VMware configs usually had a couple of switches configured, each with a couple of NIC’s, and each switch would support multiple VM’s. VMware virtual switches normally do NOT have an IP assigned to the switch as underlying VMware doesn’t attempt to bind an IP to the physical NIC.
Here is the list of physical NIC’s in my lab ESXi box, one NIC is currently connected to the physical network:
And here is the current switch configuration:
In this case the switch is the default one created at installation time. It includes the single cabled NIC I have in place right now. Note that there are actually two networks configured – VM Network and Management Network. The Management Network actually has an IP address assigned as that is the IP address for the VMware host itself. In many cases when a VMware host has many NIC’s the Management Network might have a NIC all to itself. The VM Network provides switch connectivity to the VM’s attached to it and an IP address is NOT assigned to the network. Note: as there is only one NIC assigned to the switch connectivity to both the host and the VM’s would be lost if the NIC failed or was disconnected from the network.
As you can see I have now added a second virtual switch (it has a NIC that is NOT cabled in to the physical network at this point). I have removed the VM Network from the first virtual switch (vSwitch0) and added a new network, VM Network 2, to the second virtual switch (vSwitch1). Now I have completely segmented my management network (physical host access) from my virtual machine network (virtual machine access). In this case the host would be accessible from the physical network as its switch (vSwitch0) has an operational NIC attached. The Server 2012 VM on vSwitch1 would NOT be accessible from the physical network as its switch does not have an operational (cabled in) NIC attached.
And now I have removed the second virtual switch, added the second NIC to the first virtual switch and moved the Server 2012 VM back on to the VM Network on the switch. In this case both the host and the VM would be accessible from the physical network as the switch has at least one operational NIC attached to it.
VMware virtual switching is pretty configurable and elastic.
Hyper-V Virtual Switch
Hyper-V virtual switches do NOT have the same ability to bind multiple NIC’s into a switch config, at least not at the virtual switch level. Traditional Hyper-V “external switches” work on the paradigm of one physical host NIC being bound to the switch. If you have a server with a whole bunch of NIC’s then you would need to create a virtual switch for each NIC that you want to use with Hyper-V. Each switch can support multiple VM’s attached to it, just like VMware, but each switch can only have the one physical NIC bound to it.
With the advent of Server2012 and Hyper-V 3 the single NIC constraint can be circumvented by TEAMING NIC’s at the Server 2012 level through Server Manager. The resulting tNIC can then be selected as the “NIC” for a Hyper-V virtual switch and the virtual switch would then have the aggregated bandwidth of the underlying NIC’s. The caveat here is that the PHYSICAL SWITCH on the other end of the cables from the NIC’s has to also allow for port teaming either via a manual set up or via LACP.
The other thing to understand is that the virtual switch will “take over” most of the characteristics of the NIC/tNIC assigned to it. That means the virtual switch will take on the IP address – DHCP or STATIC – of the underlying NIC as the NIC is just a NIC to the Windows Server host. This is very important to understand when you are setting up Hyper-V, specially so on a single NIC server.
Here is the adapter configuration on my lab Hyper-V server:
This is pretty similar to my VMware server, I have two physical NIC’s but only one is actually cabled into the physical network at this time. You’ll also note the “vEthernet” connection, this is the single Hyper-V virtual switch that has been created on this box.
In the Hyper-V Manager on the server I see the following for the virtual switch config:
This is the switch that I created to support my first Hyper-V VM’s. It is created as an “External Network” which means that it provides connectivity between the attached VM’s and the physical network beyond the Hyper-V host. And, importantly, it is set to, “Allow management operating system to share the network adapter”. This is critical in a single NIC server or, as in my case, when there is only one connected NIC on a multi-NIC machine. This setting is analogous to the VMware “Management Network” in that it is what allows the Server 2012 host to “share” the NIC with the Hyper-V guests attached to the switch. If I had created this switch and NOT selected this setting I would have ended up NOT being able to access the HOST over the network as the switch would NOT share the NIC between the VM’s and the host (single operational NIC, remember?). When this setting is selected, the switch will take on many of the characteristics of the underlying NIC including its network address settings (DHCP or Static); therefore, the switch will bind itself to the IP assigned to the HOST.
This is a really important concept to grasp because I cannot create a switch and assign multiple NIC’s to it (as mentioned previously). If I have a server with a bunch of NIC’s and I go and create one virtual switch per physical NIC AND I select the “Allow management setting …” then I will be binding multiple IP addresses to my host and that is probably not what I want to do. In our office our sysadmin, Louis, was wondering why all of a sudden the Hyper-V host had pulled a bunch of DHCP addresses; the answer was he created a bunch of switches all of which had management turned on which, in turn, required an IP and the default setting is DHCP.
Note that the switch IP, if there is one, has no bearing on the IP’s assigned to the VM’s nor do the VM’s require the switch to have an assigned IP. If a switch has an IP then it is there strictly to provide connectivity passthrough to the host.
As you might imagine, it is not as easy to configure Hyper-V virtual networking to be as “elastic” as VMware virtual networking, VMware still outshines Microsoft in this regard. You CAN use NIC teaming at the Server 2012 level to create tNIC’s (teamed NIC’s) that can then be incorporated into Hyper-V virtual switches but there are caveats that have to be met. Your physical switches must “understand” how you have teamed the NIC’s and be configured (or configure themselves) accordingly. Also, depending on how the NIC’s are teamed there is the possibility of tNIC failure if an underlying teamed NIC fails. If a tNIC in a Hyper-V switch fails then the switch itself will fail. This is very different behaviour from that of the VMware virtual switching that I have discussed and it is something you need to understand as you move from VMware to Hyper-V.
Conclusion
VMware still has the edge on Microsoft when it comes to simple virtual switching (and simple is what we deal with in the SMB world). But the edge is slim and Hyper-V does offer real value and a compelling use argument. Like anything else in IT, you need to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the products you select and design your environment accordingly. I hope this discussion of VMware and Hyper-V virtual switching will help you in your endeavours.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
I am not sure about the last statement as even with VMWare you still need to go in and configure multiple NIC's on one switch for LACP, Active Passive, IP Hash, MAC Hash....... the only difference I can see is where the linking of the NIC's happens. Microsoft is before adding the Virtual NIC to the Switch, VMWare is after the switch is created and addition NIC's are added
Vice President at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Hyper-V can be run on this Dell PowerEdge
Hyper-V can be run on this Dell PowerEdge C6220.
Here is a brief upbeat compelling video overview of the Dell PowerEdge C6220 and C6220 II. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJZs2EUy9Vg
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Hello,
Yes Hyper-V works and is supported on Dell PowerEdge C6220.
This is confirmed by Dell.
Good luck!
Regards,
Charbel
Director of IT with 51-200 employees
Replica, Cost and Stability are very valuable but support has only been average - has proven to be hit-or-miss
What is most valuable?
There are a few features that make the product stand out:
How has it helped my organization?
The prime example is the simplicity and cost savings of our new DR/BCP solution. By consolidating our two disparate corporate AD2008/VMWare domains into a single Hyper-V/AD 2012 domain we have:
- Drastically reduced the complexity of the environment. NO more kludges or 3rd-party software to get systems like Exchange, Lync or AD Users conversing seamlessly.
- About $150K a year in colocation costs. With our private cloud we have a built-in DR/BCP solution on existing infrastructure, no need to farm out to a colo provider.
What needs improvement?
To be determine – we will be conducting a review of the R2 release in the second quarter of 2014.
For how long have I used the solution?
We’ve had the system in place since January 2013 and it went into full production in May 2013.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
Not outside the usual challenges in learning a new application. We had 4 months to design, install and run the new domain in parallel to former environments.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Outside of needing to keep the VM hosts patched (we did have an issue with a driver related to storage), no.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Zero – we have a pretty robust infrastructure in place for the number of staff. Clustered DL385’s & EMC VNXe at each datacenter will allow us to scale out and up easily (we are using around 12% of capacity on the VNXe and can drop additional servers into the cluster if there’s a spike in use or we make acquisitions).
How are customer service and technical support?
Customer Service: Good.Technical Support: Average. I say that as my experience with MSFT Support in general has proven to be hit-or-miss with the first-level support. The second-level support is much better and I haven’t had to go beyond them for solutions.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We had VMware/AD 2008 in place at the two companies; the US infrastructure was already built out with SAN and meshed networking so we had to play catch-up with the UK datacenter. The switch was made at the behest of the group CEO – what the boss wants the boss gets!
How was the initial setup?
Pretty straightforward without any major surprises. The online documentation written up by MSFT and the legion of fans proved to be invaluable. The setup of Replica proved to be very easy.
What about the implementation team?
Implementation was done mostly by in-house staff (2 of us) and we needed a hand from a VAR for some of the clustering setup.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Between the additional hardware/software and consultant costs we spent around $80K.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
No – we felt the two best solutions were VMware & MSFT as we had been using VMware and had many years of experience with MSFT products.
What other advice do I have?
- Do not be afraid to work $$$ into the budget in case you need assistance from a 3rd-party.
- Test in parallel and do not be a hero and try to do it whole-hog at once.
- Do not postpone the DR/BCP part of the project. If you are building out a new infrastructure DO THIS FIRST. We were forced to push this to the back of the project and it bit us for a few days; in the end you do what the executives say but having file/application/server/site disaster recovery is an absolute must before you migrate production data.
- If you haven’t gone too far with it do a review of R2; it provides many improvements in the VM & Replica features.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Infrastructure Expert at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Even better than before
Last time I wrote a review on Hyper V for 2008 R2, which is the product I was using at the time. Having had experience with Hyper V "3.0", the version included in 2012, I figured it was time to update my review.
Pro's
Hyper-V definitely has its pros!
- This version of Hyper-V is even more in depth than before, bringing it up to par with and even surpassing vSphere in some ways.
- PowerShell scripting has been greatly expanded upon, allowing for more automation and centralized management.
- Exporting a VM and importing it into a new server, or setting up fail-over clustering is easier than ever!
- The integration with the new server manager and the existing MMC substructure is superb.
Cons:
The cons are the same as the last time.
- Individual licensing costs for each server.
- If you aren't using Hyper-V Core and are running Hyper-V on top of the full Server 2008 R2 platform, then you have less resources to allocate to your Virtual Machines.
- Except through RDP or SCVMM, there is no way to access the VM's on alternative platforms (like Mac or Linux).
All in all, Microsoft Hyper-V is an excellent platform and a great competitor for VMWare, and it keeps improving with each iteration!
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Cool Marcos,
Would you be kind enough to add those missing features :>)
Thanks
Henry
Senior Manager of Infrastructure with 501-1,000 employees
Configuring and Managing Hyper-V Replica
Management Considerations
Hyper-V servers are managed locally using the Hyper-V Manager interface or remotely using the Hyper-V Remote Server Administration Tools (RSAT) or System Center Virtual Machine Manager (SCVMM). If the configuration is a Hyper-V Failover Cluster, the Failover Cluster Management interface is used.
Configuration and Management UI
Hyper-V Replica settings are configured in the Hyper-V Manager interface for standalone Hyper-V servers and the Failover Cluster Manager interface for Hyper-V Failover Clusters.
Configuration Settings
Configuring a Standalone Hyper-V Replica Server
1. In the Hyper-V Manager interface, Click on Hyper-V Settings in the Actions pane
2. In the Hyper-V Settings dialog box, Click on Replication Configuration
3. In the Details pane, Select Enable this computer as a replica server
4. Choose an Authentication method to include the port that will be used (The default ports are 80 for HTTP and 443 for HTTPS). There are default firewall rules already in place that just need to be enabled when replication is enabled on the Hyper-V server.
5. Configure Authorization and storage. This includes designating a specific location to store replica virtual machine files if the default location is not to be used. Should you not desire to allow all Primary servers to be serviced, there is an option to allow only specific servers (Primary servers) to send replication requests. If you want to allow all servers within the domain, a wildcard character can be used (e.g. *.contoso.com). When using a wildcard, only one storage location can be specified. If individual server entries are used, different storage locations for replica files can be configured. Complete all entries for the Primary Server, Storage Locations, and Security Tag information. Click Apply or OK when finished.
Configuring a Hyper-V Replica Failover Cluster
A Failover Cluster consists of multiple physical servers also known as nodes. Each node must have the Hyper-V role installed as well as the Failover Clustering feature. Installation of the Hyper-V role has already been covered. To install the Failover Clustering feature:
1. In Server Manager, start the Add Roles and Features Wizard (ARFW) by first choosing the Dashboard view and then choose Add Roles.
2. Step through the ARFW choosing the local node and making the following choices:
a. Installation Type: Role-based or Feature-based installation
b. Server Selection: Choose local node
c. Server Roles: Make no selections and click Next
d. Features: Choose Failover Clustering
e. Confirmation: Review the information and click Install (a reboot is not required when installing the Failover Clustering feature)
f. Results: Ensure the result is a successful installation of the Failover Clustering feature.
3. Complete this action across all nodes that will be members in the cluster
NOTE: The Failover Clustering feature can also be installed from the command line interface (CLI) by using the Deployment Image and Service Management (DISM) command line tool. At a command prompt, type: dism /online /enable-feature /featurename:Failover-Clustering. A reboot is not required to complete the installation.
After the Failover Clustering feature is installed and a Failover Cluster is created, the Hyper-V Replica Broker Role needs to be configured. To create the Hyper-V Replica Broker role:
1. Open the Failover Cluster Manager interface (located under Tools in the Server Manager Menu bar)
2. In the left-pane, connect to the cluster
3. With the name of the cluster highlighted in the left-hand pane, click on Configure Role in the Actions pane
4. The High Availability Wizard initializes
5. Select Hyper-V Replica Broker in the Select Role screen
6. Complete the wizard by providing a properly formatted NetBIOS name and IP address (as needed) which serves as the connection point (Client Access Point (CAP))when configuring virtual machines for replication
7. Ensure the Role comes Online and is able to failover between all nodes in the cluster
Configuring the Failover Cluster as a Replica cluster
With the Hyper-V Replica Broker Role configured in the cluster, the cluster can be configured as either a Primary cluster or a Replica cluster. This is accomplished using the Highly Available Hyper-V Replica role. To accomplish this:
1. Open the Failover Cluster Manager interface (located under Tools in the Server Manager Menu bar)
2. In the left-pane, connect to the cluster
3. With the name of the cluster highlighted in the left-hand pane, click on Roles in the details pane under the Navigate category
4. Right-click on the Role and choose Replication Settings
5. In the Hyper-V Replica Clustering Broker Configuration screen, make the appropriate selections as needed to configure the cluster as a Replica server.
This action implements the configuration across all nodes in the cluster. Keep in mind this does not automatically enable the correct firewall rules in each node of the cluster nor does it properly configure authentication if certificates are being used. Those actions will have to be completed by the administrator on each node in the cluster. When using certificate based authentication in a Failover Cluster, all of the cluster nodes and the Client Access Point (CAP) supporting the Hyper-V Replica role will need machine certificates.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Hyper-V Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: January 2026
Product Categories
Server Virtualization SoftwarePopular Comparisons
VMware vSphere
Proxmox VE
Red Hat OpenShift
Nutanix AHV Virtualization
Oracle VM VirtualBox
Oracle VM
Citrix XenServer
RHEV
oVirt
XCP-ng virtualization platform
IBM PowerVM
VMware ESXi
OpenVZ
ISPsystem VMmanager
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Hyper-V Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- VMware vs. Hyper-V - Which do you prefer?
- Do you think there is a minimum critical threshold that justifies the deployment of the System Center suite?
- How does Hyper-V compare to alternative Virtualization solutions?
- What Is The Biggest Difference Between Hyper-V And KVM?
- How does KVM compare with Hyper-V?
- How does Proxmox VE compare with Hyper-V?
- When evaluating Server Virtualization Software, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- VMware ESXi or VMware Workstation?
- VMware vs. Hyper-V - Which do you prefer?
- How does VMware ESXi compare to alternative virtualization solutions?















Good Compare and Artikel , Next Vsphere 6.0 With MS Server