Open Stack

I don't want to speak on behalf of RH, but, to my knowledge, the decision
about supporting or not supporting RHEL on various virtualization platforms
is a technology decision, not a go-to-market decision. Neither does Red Hat
explicitly refuse to do so, they just don't do it right now.

In offering guest support for RHEL, RH has to do backwards compatibility
testing for all releases of RHEL dating 13 years back on that particular
virtualization platform. This is technologically challenging thus RH would
only invest in it if there is a clear revenue potential for RHEL on that
platform. RHEL on Amazon and vCenter - potential is clear. RHEL on Mirantis
OpenStack or Piston OpenStack - maybe not so mcuh... this may look ugly on
the outside, but there is actually merit to this.

-Boris


On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:09 PM, matt <matt at nycresistor.com> wrote:

> Kind of raises the question:
>
> "If OpenStack defines a standard for what is and is not an OpenStack ( tm
> ) distribution, while it also entail cross distribution support
> requirements?  or any specific supported configuration requirements?"
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Kyle MacDonald <kyle.macdonald at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dave
>> How do you see them creating a reliance on RHEL (not doubting just
>> wanting to make sure I see your view).
>>
>> RH (in OpenStack) is selling the OS for infrastructure (including KVM as
>> a virt). While making sure other OS implementations can functionally run is
>> a given, asking them to provide support for those OS's is a bit much.
>>
>>
>> The sore spot here is the RHEL guest OS on top of other OpenStack (non
>> RHEL OS) platforms. RHEL not being certified on other virt platforms isn't
>> that irregular. They support(ed) Xen, VMWare and (I think) hyper-v. Their
>> support policy on the web as recently as last year said they would give
>> best effort but had no guarantee (SLA).
>>
>> I've been deep in this for the last 2 years and while we all would
>> "appreciate" RedHat changing it's policy this was always a commercial
>> decision. Frankly speaking if any of the other distro's wanted to invest
>> deeply in the kernel (KVM) and core talent similar to RH investment levels
>> this would be easier to discuss. RHEL is sold as enterprise class ...blah
>> blah blah ... But that really means they do testing, certification and can
>> assure customers that there is a plan and model in place should the need
>> arise.
>>
>>
>> Example:
>> Customer x has a prob within their RHEL implementation, they call RH for
>> support, RH determines the issue may be in the host infrastructure, if its
>> a Debian Distro who does RH call to work with? Who makes sure the patch can
>> be generated to be sure RH doesn't violate it's support agreements, do the
>> other OS vendors have that deep experience and community involvement to do
>> that? Obviously the answers vary and therefore a uniform support model
>> isn't practical.
>>
>> Customers can and should vote with their feet - if your host
>> infrastructure is ready to play then compete, otherwise you should start a
>> commercial discussion.
>>
>> Kyle
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 14, 2014, at 2:20 PM, Dave Nielsen <dnielsen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm no lawyer, but I think it would be hard to prove RHEL has a monopoly.
>> Still, Red Hat has turned a reliance on RHEL by OpenStack customers into a
>> clear liability for the rest of the OpenStack community. Rather taking Red
>> Hat to court, it seems it would healthier to get serious about supporting a
>> competitive alternative, or helping to create one.
>>
>> [this my opinion, not that of anyone I may consult for from time to time]
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> Dave Nielsen
>> Principal Consultant: Platform D, Inc <http://platformd.com>.
>> Part-time Consultant to HP Helion
>> Co-founder: CloudCamp <http://cloudcamp.org>, BigDataCamp<http://www.bigdatacamp.org>
>> Co-chair: Cloud SIG <http://cloudsig.org>; SFBay OpenStack<http://www.meetup.com/openstack>
>> , SVDevOps <http://svdevops.com>, SVBigData <http://svbigdata.com>
>> twitter davenielsen <http://twitter.com/davenielsen>; linkedin dnielsen<http://linkedin.com/in/dnielsen>; fb:
>> dcnielsen <http://fb.com/dcnielsen>
>> skype davenielsen; gtalk dnielsen; mobile: 415-531-6674
>> <http://www.apbspeakers.com/speaker/dave-nielsen>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Joshua McKenty <joshua at pistoncloud.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, that’s the one. I’ve printed a PDF just to help out.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>>>
>>> Joshua McKenty
>>> Chief Technology Officer
>>> Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
>>> +1 (650) 242-5683
>>> +1 (650) 283-6846
>>> http://www.pistoncloud.com
>>>
>>>  "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
>>> "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."
>>>
>>> On May 14, 2014, at 11:26 AM, Stefano Maffulli <stefano at openstack.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> is it this one? Title: Red Hat Plays Hardball on OpenStack Software
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCsQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303851804579560290024021158.html&ei=aIpzU_vzFevJsQT_kIGoBw&usg=AFQjCNHe46xKvlhxjlEttnUlRWwzhEXyLA&sig2=sMzbNDF7bRan-69AJ0a5fQ&bvm=bv.66699033,d.cWc&cad=rja
>>>
>>> Trick: if you google the title of the article, WSJ will give you the
>>> full article but if you follow the url straight from a link, WSJ
>>> requires login
>>>
>>> On 05/14/2014 09:38 AM, Joshua McKenty wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry
>>> -
>>> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303851804579560290024021158
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Joshua McKenty
>>> Chief Technology Officer
>>> Piston Cloud Computing, Inc.
>>> +1 (650) 242-5683
>>> +1 (650) 283-6846
>>> http://www.pistoncloud.com
>>>
>>> "Oh, Westley, we'll never survive!"
>>> "Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has."
>>>
>>> On May 14, 2014, at 6:34 AM, Dave Neary <dneary at redhat.com
>>> <mailto:dneary at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Josh,
>>>
>>> Do you have a link?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dave.
>>>
>>> On 05/14/2014 09:07 AM, Joshua McKenty wrote:
>>>
>>> Board members et al,
>>>
>>> As usual, I am not a lawyer. However, given the overtones of
>>> antitrust concern in this article, if other board members and/or
>>> foundation staff feel that we should discuss this, I would ask that
>>> we schedule a quick board-coffee-meeting. We need to avoid any
>>> walking quorums, and we also need to instruct Jonathan and foundation
>>> staff with a clear response. This is not a topic where I feel it
>>> would be appropriate for Alan to represent the board.
>>>
>>> Joshua
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org <mailto:Foundation at lists.openstack.org>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Neary - Community Action and Impact
>>> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
>>> Ph: +33 9 50 71 55 62 / Cell: +33 6 77 01 92 13
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foundation mailing list
> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20140514/5825a4be/attachment-0001.html>