Yeah, I guess that ipexperts reply to this is "To do like that would be cool but too expensive".
/J 2010/7/19 Ian McGowan <[email protected]> > I imagine they need support people on hand at the scheduled start times in > the event problems occur. Using tokens in that fashion would mean the start > times could be random and therefore would require 24/7 on hand support = > expensive. > > Adapt and overcome :-) > > Ian > > On 19 Jul 2010, at 20:56, Jimmy Larsson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ok. In my Utopia-world-of-perfect-things (thos who knows me knows that I > often refer to it. ;) ) I build a flexible booking-system that makes the > customer able to: > * Schedule a system for x hours in a row where x could be 1 - 16 (or > something like that) > * be charged for those x hours by withdrawing x tokens from their account > * start a session ad-hoc without pre-booking. > * extend a current session as long as the current pod is available. > > Of course that system must be able to intelligently select which pod to > place each customer on, which might be a somwehat advanced algoritm. But > since such a system would be able to take all bookings into account at each > given time it would dedicate each session to a physical pod not until the > session starts so that it could do proper planning to be effective. Lets > call that system EIGRP for rack-rental, but ut would kick-ass. I know plenty > of developers that would be able to implement such a system and I am sure > that you do as well. > > In my opinion the first rackrental-company that offers this would be a > winner (at least the winner of my money!). > > 4 hours sessions is only slightly better than 8 hour sessions. What if my > companys conf-room-booking-system (O*tl**k) said "sorry, you cannot use that > empty room ad-hoc, it can only be booked in advance and only for 8-hour > slots. So you wanna have a short 1 hour meeting? You have too book > 2pm-10pm." > > /Jimmy > > > 2010/7/19 Marko Milivojevic < <[email protected]>[email protected]> > >> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 19:25, Jimmy Larsson < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> > Why is it unrealistic? >> >> For the very least of reasons, that would lead to having separate >> device pools, of which one could be overused, while other one is >> unused. Migrating and managing device pools may be an issue and >> additional cost. >> >> Think of load sharing here... We'd need EIGRP for vRack sessions... :-) >> >> -- >> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 >> Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert >> >> YES! We include 400 hours of REAL rack >> time with our Blended Learning Solution! >> >> Mailto: <[email protected]>[email protected] >> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 >> Fax: +1.810.454.0130 >> Web: <http://www.ipexpert.com/>http://www.ipexpert.com/ >> > > > > -- > ------- > Jimmy Larsson > Ryavagen 173 > s-26030 Vallakra > Sweden > <http://blogg.kvistofta.nu>http://blogg.kvistofta.nu > ------- > > _______________________________________________ > > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit <http://www.ipexpert.com>www.ipexpert.com > > -- ------- Jimmy Larsson Ryavagen 173 s-26030 Vallakra Sweden http://blogg.kvistofta.nu -------
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
