Hyper-V 2012 R2 Network Architectures Series (Part 7 of 7) – Conclusions and Summary


Congratulations. You reached the last of these 7 posts covering the most common Hyper-V Network Architectures today. Maybe you don’t remember all the pros/cons and caveats on each case, but don’t worry. I’ve built this table that summarizes the most important factors to consider when deciding which Hyper-V Network Architecture you want to use. As I said from the beginning, there is not one unique best practice but different options for different situations or needs. Each column in the table represents an important factor to consider and each row represents the 5 scenarios covered in the Series. I’ve added a last column to categorize each scenario based on Performance and Throughput. I find it useful to explain the differences and I hope you find it useful as well. I personally prefer the Non-Converged Network Architecture if possible and affordable but there is no reason to discard the other options if you know how the end to end solution works and how the different pieces in the backend and Windows interact with each other.




Standardized INF Keywords for RSS


Standardized INF Keywords for VMQ


VMQ Deep Dive




NIC Teaming Whitepapers

Windows Server 2012


Windows Server 2012 R2


Hyper-V Virtual Switch


Comments (6)

  1. Nice post Christian. I would point out however, that dedicated management CAN be done in a converged network with VMM design, provided there is an addition NIC or pair of NICs available. I just finished implementing one such design for a customer. I personally am a strong advocate for the converged networking with VMM approach.

  2. Hi Wes. As I mentioned, there are almost unlimited combinations but these 5 are the most common ones in general. Regarding your approach, you will have RSS for MGMT, but how you manage the CSV and LM? Over the Converged Network with vNICs right? and what sVMQ setup are you using?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Hi Virtualization gurus, Since 6 months now, I’ve been working on the internal readiness about Hyper

  4. Anonymous says:

    As an IT guy I have the strong belief that engineers understand graphics and charts much better than

  5. Anonymous says:

      ** Newly updated to include 2012 R2 Best Practices. See 11/03/2013 blog regarding R2 updates by

  6. Jiri Vild says:

    Very useful information for networking guy (mainly focused on Cisco). Currently I found necessary to understand MS Virtual networking concept, because now is blurring line between "pure" networking and server areas.

    I would like to point out to the fact, that is done huge efford in DC networking (Nexus switches) to provide "switch clustering" – with technologies like vPC, or VSS. The important thing is that in case "switch independent mode teaming" – the network architecture
    (vPC concept) is broken. The reason is that is assumed that trafic from core to server edge switches is not passed between edge switches – throuh vPC peer link – but packets are delivered directly to server NIC. Also, LACP protocol is considered as good way
    how to control state of ports-to-NIC aligement and state.