I understand, but the concern when we were talking was that there's no clear upgrade path from the free/community version to the paid. The free version would require cloudstack to configure it, and as I mentioned the main draw of the paid version aside from support is that the user has an API to configure it themselves. Its also a complete reimage, its not a matter of dropping your key in, there's missing software.
I agree that there is usually some way to make money, I'm just sharing the info from my discussion with vyatta in September when we were asking if they could work with cloudstack. Perhaps the acquisition changed things. The way I see it though is that there are two separate things that require two different integration methods; the community version and the subscription version. If they only integrate the subscription version they'll make money but have very low adoption and utility for the cloudstack community, if they do both, there's no seamless upsell, its basically a fresh start with a new router. I am personally excited to see companies jump on board and support cloudstack, I hope they and others do. But I hope these companies also provide open and/or free contributions, so that cloudstack has a solid base rather than requiring purchases to build a feature-rich deployment. On Dec 11, 2012 12:34 AM, "Musayev, Ilya" <imusa...@webmd.net> wrote: > Marcus, > > There is always ways to make money.. This is straight from Wikipedia - I > think the same model will be applied here - except distribution and > adoption is now handled via CS. It also going to work great and in their > favor for marketing purposes. They will be able to reach much greater > audience. > > "Vyatta sells a subscription edition that includes all the functionality > of the open source version as well as a graphical user interface, access to > Vyatta's RESTful API's, Serial Support, TACACS+, Config Sync, System Image > Cloning, software updates, 24x7 phone and email technical support, and > training." > > Regards > ilya > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 10:42 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: CentOS System VM? > > I believe she gave me her card at the conference. Scott Sneddon from > vyatta introduced us, she said she would be asking the devs about details > on implementing their own network service. > > When I was talking with Scott about it a few months back there really > wasn't a clear idea of what's in it for them to develop such a thing. They > make their money on support and most importantly their API in the > commercial software, and cloudstack sort of takes those over, at least for > the existing virtual routers. Other than that its a solid Debian build with > vetted open source networking packages and would make a decent, if a bit > large, system VM. > On Dec 10, 2012 7:43 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" <imusa...@webmd.net> wrote: > > > So just to give you an update, the Vyatta developer mentioned she will > > reach out to David Nalley - since David mentioned they are 15 minutes > > away from each other and would be easy to arrange a meeting. > > > > It's Christmas time and I assume December will be a slow month, plus > > it seems like CS is not the urgent priority to them - never the less, > > I'll introduce her to this mailing list and will try to help and > > assist with whatever I can. > > > > Regards > > ilya > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 2:07 PM > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > Subject: Re: CentOS System VM? > > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Bryan Whitehead <dri...@megahappy.net> > > wrote: > > > having custom systemvm's seems ideal. A network offering can be > > > paired with a systemVM (or something along those lines). > > > > > > Giving the community the ability to create their own Vyatta-like > > > offerings is what will drive innovation. Would be fantastic to have > > > a number of VPN/LB/IDS/etc offerings in the marketplace to choose > > > from that just work seamlessly inside cloudstack. > > > > Huge +1 to this. IMO, I prefer virtual appliances to physical for > > network services... and being able to delegate instantiation and > > lifecycle to the same logic that manages system VMs would be a very > valuable option. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Kelceydamage@bbits <kel...@bbits.ca> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Great to hear. Let me know the name of the developer, and I'll talk > > >> to the west coast arm if Vyatta and get them to match the > contribution. > > >> > > >> Sent from my iPhone > > >> > > >> On Dec 6, 2012, at 9:12 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" <imusa...@webmd.net> > wrote: > > >> > > >> > Kelcey > > >> > > > >> > Made some headway already. > > >> > > > >> > Got a response from one Viyatta developer who was referred to us > > >> > from > > >> CEO as per my previous LinkedIn message. > > >> > > > >> > I will introduce him/her to CS but I will need CS dev team to > > >> > help out > > >> with knowledge gap and transfer. As well as people like you and I > > >> for testing and whatever else we can do to help move this along. > > >> > > > >> > -ilya > > >> > > > >> > "Kelcey Damage (BBITS)" <kel...@bbits.ca> wrote: > > >> > That's why I did some in person work. I am going to really try > > >> > and > > >> massage > > >> > my relationship with Brocade and get access to the Vyatta engineers. > > >> > > > >> > Hopefully between us we can get in touch with at least one > > >> > influencer at Brocade/Vyatta. > > >> > > > >> > -kd > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net] > > >> > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 11:19 AM > > >> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > >> > Subject: RE: CentOS System VM? > > >> > > > >> > I started contacting few people, I contacted CEO of Vyatta and > > >> > another person who now works for Citrix but was VP of Marketing > > >> > for Vyatta. I did both contacts via LinkedIn. > > >> > I do think LinkedIn will probably be ignored because it's a great > > >> marketing > > >> > spam tool. > > >> > > > >> > We should try direct email. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Kelceydamage@bbits [mailto:kel...@bbits.ca] > > >> > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 12:42 PM > > >> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > >> > Subject: Re: CentOS System VM? > > >> > > > >> > Interesting, I spoke with Brocade yesterday and the also feel > > >> > their > > >> Vyatta > > >> > acquisition is a good gap offering for cloud services. > > >> > > > >> > Maybe we should see if their willing to produce the code? > > >> > > > >> > Sent from my iPhone > > >> > > > >> > On Dec 6, 2012, at 9:07 AM, Clayton Weise <cwe...@iswest.net> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> I would love to see a Vyatta based router as well, and they have > > >> >> a > > >> RESTful > > >> > API (which is both good and bad given the mixture of tools. But > > >> > making > > >> use > > >> > of a REST interface on a virtual router opens up the ability to > > >> > integrate with other vendors who have virtual router/firewall > > appliances. > > >> >> > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > >> >> From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net] > > >> >> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 8:43 AM > > >> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > >> >> Subject: RE: CentOS System VM? > > >> >> > > >> >> Vyatta provides great L3-L4 support with good number of features > > >> >> and > > >> > interface. > > >> >> > > >> >> If there is a doc on how to create and integrate your system > > >> >> offering - > > >> > that would be great. Unfortunately vyatta is also debian based.. > > >> > but > > >> that's > > >> > not exactly a hard negative. > > >> >> > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > >> >> From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net] > > >> >> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 11:25 AM > > >> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > >> >> Subject: RE: CentOS System VM? > > >> >> > > >> >> I guess we can try creating alternative system offering :) > > >> >> > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > > >> >> From: Kelceydamage@bbits [mailto:kel...@bbits.ca] > > >> >> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 3:17 AM > > >> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > >> >> Subject: Re: CentOS System VM? > > >> >> > > >> >> I'm also interested in swapping out ha_proxy for nginx so the lb > > >> >> feature > > >> > can support SSL termination. Currently building my own VRs as > > >> > guest VMs > > >> on > > >> > shared networks for that feature. > > >> >> > > >> >> Is the community thinking about proper ssl endpoints and > offloading? > > >> >> > > >> >> Sent from my iPhone > > >> >> > > >> >> On Dec 5, 2012, at 11:30 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" > > >> >> <imusa...@webmd.net> > > >> wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >>> Granted both debian wheezy and centos/rhel 6, run the same > > >> >>> major kernel > > >> > version 2.6.32 i386 and hopefully same glibc library (need to > > >> > confirm) - > > >> it > > >> > should be really easy to port the code over without needing to > > >> > recompile anything. I don't believe we do anything overly complex > > >> > - within > > >> application > > >> > code - that would glue components to specific OS. Applications > > >> > like > > >> apache, > > >> > dns masq, haproxy, sshd and dhcp can be stock versions of what OS > > >> > vendor released. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> This is my observations so far and I will give it a shot when > > >> >>> time > > >> allows > > >> > to confirm. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> If someone knows of reason why this would fail, please let me > > >> >>> know so I > > >> > don't waste my time:) but I am fairly optimistic. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Thanks > > >> >>> Ilya > > >> >>> > > >> >>> "Kelceydamage@bbits" <kel...@bbits.ca> wrote: > > >> >>> This sounds great, however I am hoping for updated wiki on how > > >> >>> to > > >> create > > >> > your own system vm(distro). > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Maybe one day.... > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Sent from my iPhone > > >> >>> > > >> >>> On Dec 5, 2012, at 5:04 PM, Chiradeep Vittal > > >> > <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: > > >> >>> > > >> >>>> The current system vm is getting long in the tooth. I (or > > >> >>>> Rohit > > >> >>>> Yadav) will looking into building a wheezy-based systemvm that > > >> >>>> includes hyper-v drivers. > > >> >>>> Hopefully network throughput should be better as well when > > >> >>>> used with multiple cores. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> On 12/5/12 10:38 AM, "Jason Davis" <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>>> TBH Hyper-V synthetic drivers(modules) is supported in the > > >> >>>>> mainline kernel. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> So the argument that CentOS 6.x has better support is moot. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> This assumes that the kernel version on the SSVM is at least > > 2.6.32. > > >> >>>>> I ran Ubuntu Server 11.x and Centos 6.x on Hyper-V natively > > >> >>>>> and just needed to load the kernel modules for the synthetic > > >> >>>>> stuffs to > > >> > work. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> Ancient example of getting the Hyper-V modules built/working > > >> >>>>> on Debian 6.0 > > >> >>>>> http://virtualisationandmanagement.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/d > > >> >>>>> eb > > >> >>>>> ian- o n-hype r-v-with-4-vcpu-support-and-syntetic-network/ > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Kelceydamage@bbits > > >> >>>>> <kel...@bbits.ca> > > >> >>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>>> I'm very interested in this. > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> On Dec 5, 2012, at 10:10 AM, Donal Lafferty > > >> >>>>>> <donal.laffe...@citrix.com> > > >> >>>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> Has anyone looked into building a system VM that runs on a > > >> >>>>>>> CentOS > > >> >>>>>> distro? > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
