Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


OnApp for SolusVM Service Providers
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

OnApp for SolusVM Service Providers

Just got sent this via e-mail: http://www2.onapp.com/solus-vsp.html

If I understand this correctly, OnApp are offering their services to your customers from inside SolusVM. While they make a valid point in highlighting the differences between a SolusVM-based VPS and an OnApp machine, I'm not sure how happy people are about this.

«13

Comments

  • perennateperennate Member, Host Rep
    edited September 2015

    mpkossen said: OnApp are offering their services to your customers from inside SolusVM.

    What do you mean by that? It's clearly optional service ("choose which clouds you want to sell"). I assume you create a VM type and specify it to link to some OnApp cloud instead of local SolusVM nodes.

  • RadiRadi Host Rep, Veteran

    Costs $250 in service credit.

  • NullMindNullMind Member
    edited September 2015

    @Radi said:
    Costs $250 in service credit.

    Thats just the one time deposit, this deposit is then used to pay the balance of the VM's bought (and sold) from your account.

    OnApp is normally $500 per month, in this case it's free, and we even host it for you :)

  • RadiRadi Host Rep, Veteran

    @NullMind said:
    OnApp is normally $500 per month, in this case it's free, and we even host it for you :)

    Still not free, one would like to test their things, before starting to sell.

  • @Radi said:
    Still not free, one would like to test their things, before starting to sell.

    Hi Radi, we believe a $250 deposit is a very low entry barrier to allow such functionality and offer capability in the cloud space, unfortunately a deposit is a requirement as the VM's our clients will sell are provided by the OnApp Federation, and have a cost to it.

    This is the cheapest way ever for a provider to start selling Cloud :)

  • ditlevditlev Member, Top Host, Host Rep

    @Radi said:
    Still not free, one would like to test their things, before starting to sell.

    @NullMind said:
    This is the cheapest way ever for a provider to start selling Cloud :)

    Well, at least the cheapest way of getting your own OnApp cloud. We even host it for you for free.

  • @ditlev said:
    Well, at least the cheapest way of getting your own OnApp cloud. We even host it for you for free.

    I still want to know the legal ramifications of this federation thing...I can see a bunch of potential problems legally. Have you guys consulted a lawyer on this? What about ever provider having different ToS and AUP.

  • ditlevditlev Member, Top Host, Host Rep
    edited September 2015

    @OnraHost said:
    I still want to know the legal ramifications of this federation thing...I can see a bunch of potential problems legally. Have you guys consulted a lawyer on this? What about ever provider having different ToS and AUP.

    We've had an army of lawyers on this, we're not playing around here. I understand your concerns obviously. Though, this is not different from someone reselling Softlayer or even buying a Hostgator reseller account. We just made it a whole lot easier, and way way (WAY) larger scale.

    So, all service providers are buying (and contracting) with us, the legal entity OnApp, we then in return contract with the suppliers.
    That means that WE sit with the full legal (and financial) risk. Even to the point of buyers not actually paying for the services they request from the federation ... since we sit as the seller, and the buyer, we would always pay for the services consumed.

    That is also the case for AUP/TOS, buyers would have to adhere to ours. And sellers have to accept those as valid for their infrastructure.

    We sit as the middle layer, automating and facilitating access to world wide infrastructure...



    Wish you had infrastructure in Turkey or Tokyo? DONE

    Wish you had Hipaa compliant services? DONE

    Wish you had PCI/DSS compliant DC's? DONE

    Wish you could offer 1000's of boxes without long term contracts? DONE

    etc etc - you get the point... :)

    It's all available from the federation, with no long term contracts, no commitments or anything else but a $250 initial one time deposit that you can use towards buying from the federation.

    :)

    D

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited September 2015

    My main issue with it is that from an end users perspective I really so no advantage of using a solusvm bolt-on reseller over cloud.net directly, 2GB 2 core, 50GB West coast USA SSD the buy rates are only about $3 less than cloud.net retail.

    I am sure some BIG players will lap this up as a great bolt on for existing enterprise grade customers but the buy point is about 895% higher for federated resources than simply running my own.

    That's just for my own business model but either way not a single one could be sold here due to the price limits, maybe some BIG players will like this but anyone big enough to want to pay near 900% more for resources than I do probably already uses on-app or has their own infrastructure.

    Further to that I tested cloud.net a week or so ago and the hardware was older than the hardware I use and there is no native IPv6.

    Seems like its been very well thought out though, I suspect its been single track reasoning that wont fit this market or even the primary WHT market either though, maybe the start of an amazon competitor though?

    Either way its good to see some solusvm progress.

  • OnraHostOnraHost Member
    edited September 2015

    ditlev said: Though, this is not different from someone reselling Softlayer or even buying a Hostgator reseller account.

    Completely different. You're reselling from one company, with that companies resources and their terms, not from a middle-man (OnApp), then company A, B, C, D, E, etc. etc.

    Who deals with SLA? If their is downtime (network or power wise at the DC) who is issuing credits or refunds? Are IP prices the same across the board, or will each location be different? What about refunds? Who processes that? So many questions to be honest.

    Can I have access to this for a $25 deposit? This would be purely for test, and maybe 1 test VM just to see . Or is that $250 refundable? If you;re going to try and convince hosts to not expand their own infrastructure, and to use the Federation, you're going to have to give us a little lee-way and viewing and testing it. Nobody gonna want to fork over $250 to never use it.

    Also who's managing abuse? In 120% theory, I could get a bunch of SPAMMERS, collect their money, buy from Federation, have them tare up all those IP's, then I get to keep all money, they get kicked off VM's (hopefully I presume), but I still have 0 IP's blacklisted and a pocket full of money. Does federation have a feedback system t prevent things like this?

    What about illegal content, adult content, etc... Is that strictly prohibited by your TOS/AUP?

    What about support issues? VM down, packet loss, overloaded node, or whatever else anybody can think of. Who am I submitting these tickets to? Is their an internal system to deal with it or is whoever having to look up which VM, which company, then go to their site?

  • rds100rds100 Member
    edited September 2015

    $250 entry deposit shouldn't be a problem if you are a host. The OnApp guys probably don't want every kid to start overloading their support, so putting some entry level barriers to weed out the people just wanting to play with something new sounds reasonable.

    But what i really don't understand is how different TOS/AUP will be handled and how communication will happen between the clound pond owners and the providers selling services to their customers in someone else's cloud. Will OnApp play middle man in this communication? What abuse, what about support (i.e. network doesn't work, slow IO, etc.)?

    Thanked by 2AnthonySmith ditlev
  • @rds100 said:
    $250 entry deposit shouldn't be a problem if you are a host.

    If that $250 is refundable...sure. But normally deposits are non-refundable, which is way to much for me to login and spin up a VPS or two just to see how it all works.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider

    rds100 said: $250 entry deposit shouldn't be a problem if you are a host. The OnApp guys probably don't want every kid to start overloading their support, so putting some entry level barriers to weed out the people just wanting to play with something new sounds reasonable.

    I completely agree with that, its clearly in no way shape or form aimed at the LET/B or 80% of the WHT market IMO, I think its more aimed at an alternative to being a high level AWS partner or certified azure partner.

  • OnraHost said: If that $250 is refundable...sure. But normally deposits are non-refundable, which is way to much for me to login and spin up a VPS or two just to see how it all works.

    >

    Even if it's not refundable, as long as it doesn't expire it's not a big problem. You could use the credit to host a secondary DNS offsite for several years for instance. Or a status page or something else that you'd want to be hosted somewhere else.

    Thanked by 2ditlev AnthonySmith
  • ditlevditlev Member, Top Host, Host Rep
    edited September 2015

    @OnraHost said: Completely different. You're reselling from one company, with that companies resources and their terms, not from a middle-man (OnApp), then company A, B, C, D, E, etc. etc.

    Actually not different at all.
    I do not know any service providers that are not reselling someone.
    Like, in my old business (100tb.com) we had thousands of servers with Softlayer. We were being very open about reselling them. Softlayer was actually largely reselling Internap (at the time, that has changed now), and even Internap had suppliers of IP and infrastructure supplied to them from providers above.
    Going to the extreme power, DC's...etc. There are already many layers of supply to pretty much any service provider out there.

    We've just build an abstraction layer in-between taking all the hassle away and giving you one simple management interface to world wide infrastructure.

    @OnraHost said: Who deals with SLA? If their is downtime (network or power wise at the DC) who is issuing credits or refunds? Are IP prices the same across the board, or will each location be different? What about refunds? Who processes that? So many questions to be honest.

    There are no SLA's, but we've provided something better. We give you historical insight into the performance of the infrastructure supply before you buy. So, you can see the uptime, network performance, CPU ... even the IOPS in the SAN ... before you make your buying decision.
    SLA's generally only cover parts of what you paid (in best case) to the service provider. As a buyer you should really care more about historical performance ... like real empirical data on the infrastructure.

    Again, back when I had UK2Group, if someone asked me 'Ditlev, how is your hosting?' I would say 'Real good!', but the buyer would honestly not know before sitting on my infrastructure for 6 months or more.

    We have setup systems to provide that level of transparency, making it super easy for you to pick and chose what you like.

    Why no SLA's? We thought a lot about it, but that would force us to curate the suppliers, and only take those with the highest uptime.
    We wanted to make sure that we had all prices and qualities available. Like, if you are number crunching or image transcoding or something like that, you would not care about uptime, but only about getting cheap CPU. And if we had SLA's on everything, we could not offer you something at a suitable price level.

    So we decided not to curate, but to keep it open to all qualities of supply, but make it real clear what quality you are buying by serving you all the metrics you'd like to see in order to make an informed decision.
    Makes sense?

    @OnraHost said: Can I have access to this for a $25 deposit? This would be purely for test, and maybe 1 test VM just to see . Or is that $250 refundable? If you;re going to try and convince hosts to not expand their own infrastructure, and to use the Federation, you're going to have to give us a little lee-way and viewing and testing it. Nobody gonna want to fork over $250 to never use it.

    No, this:

    @rds100 said:
    $250 entry deposit shouldn't be a problem if you are a host. The OnApp guys probably don't want every kid to start overloading their support, so putting some entry level barriers to weed out the people just wanting to play with something new sounds reasonable.

    ...is the reason why

    @OnraHost said:Also who's managing abuse? In 120% theory, I could get a bunch of SPAMMERS, collect their money, buy from Federation, have them tare up all those IP's, then I get to keep all money, they get kicked off VM's (hopefully I presume), but I still have 0 IP's blacklisted and a pocket full of money. Does federation have a feedback system t prevent things like this?

    What about illegal content, adult content, etc... Is that strictly prohibited by your TOS/AUP?

    All buyers have to agree to our T&C's, they are handed out before deposit is paid. And we have a feedback system on the way. Will be out very shortly. Both for buyers and sellers.

    @OnraHost said: What about support issues? VM down, packet loss, overloaded node, or whatever else anybody can think of. Who am I submitting these tickets to? Is their an internal system to deal with it or is whoever having to look up which VM, which company, then go to their site?

    Support requests are initially handled by our L1-3 guys, but can also be channeled directly through to the supplier. Again, this is no different from any other reseller scenario.

    Thanks for all your questions/comments :)

    :)

    D

    Thanked by 1MikeA
  • NullMindNullMind Member
    edited September 2015

    @AnthonySmith said:
    My main issue with it is that from an end users perspective I really so no advantage of using a solusvm bolt-on reseller over cloud.net directly, 2GB 2 core, 50GB West coast USA SSD the buy rates are only about $3 less than cloud.net retail.

    Anthony, the objective is that your clients don't need to go shopping elsewhere for access to infrastructure on another location they might require, with that infrastructure being available via the host they already know and trust, then the host retains the customer.

    Seems like its been very well thought out though, I suspect its been single track reasoning that wont fit this market or even the primary WHT market either though, maybe the start of an amazon competitor though?

    Or maybe an opportunity for hosts here to also attract some different market clients ? :)

    Either way its good to see some solusvm progress.

    Thanks, and there is much more in store for SolusVM !

  • CloudconeCloudcone Member, Patron Provider

    They have some sample prices out. http://www2.onapp.com/sample-vsp-pricing.html


    Too expensive?

  • drserverdrserver Member, Host Rep

    I just don't see any valid point hosting my clients outside of my zone of control / infrastructure / network and my partner upstreams.

    What if 3rd party is running ssd raid0 and loose all data what my client is having there ?

    Thanked by 2wych cassa
  • And whats the price for resources? How this is working?..

  • OnApp_TerryOnApp_Terry Member
    edited September 2015

    @drserver said:
    I just don't see any valid point hosting my clients outside of my zone of control / infrastructure / network and my partner upstreams.

    What if 3rd party is running ssd raid0 and loose all data what my client is having there ?

    So this is actually expanding your serviceable market, whether it be from different infrastructure types, or new available locations. Imagine, you have one client who asks for the cheapest storage possible -- they just want something to host their personal pictures. Another client asks for top end SSD based hosting, with backups of backups. You'd have to purchase/lease new hardware to handle both clients, and then manage two different infrastructure types. Or in a worse scenario, one client doesn't sign up with you. With this model, it's easy to find a infrastructure provider who can handle either one of your clients, and you sign them both up.

    As for hardware reliability, as Ditlev mentioned above we do provide historical performance/reliability metrics. Along with that, infrastructure is fully transparent, and you can choose who you purchase infrastructure from.

  • @OnApp_Terry stop trying to add a marketing spin onto your product and actually read what @drserver said.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited September 2015

    Well I am confused then, it 'feels' like OnApp think its a viable offer for the current market place i.e. current hosts that use solusvm, personally I dont see that as its such a massive difference in buy price and the margins are tiny compared to cloud.net

    I really don't see it but perhaps I am missing a bigger picture, my feeling is there is nothing I would gain from this opportunity which will cost an extra 800 - 900% in some cases to me as a host that I could not significantly exceed by spending just an extra 300% on my own infrastructure.

    I see the possibilities to large IT management organisations that provide IAAS etc but not for this market.

    Edit: Just for clarity I am not spitting any venom here, just my feedback as I see it, if this is supposed to me targeted at me then maybe we can have a conference call or something so you can help me/us understand? if it is not targeted at me then I understand it a bit more but I certainly don't understand the requirement for it to be solusvm linked.

    Thanked by 2wych rgenzon
  • Well I am confused then, it 'feels' like OnApp think its a viable offer for the current market place i.e. current hosts that use solusvm, personally I dont see that as its such a massive difference in buy price and the margins are tiny compared to cloud.net

    >

    I really don't see it but perhaps I am missing a bigger picture, my feeling is there is nothing I would gain from that would not be far exceeded by investing an extra 800 - 900% in my own infrastructure.

    +1, Why have sales/marketing team when you can let other hosts buy space on your nodes for clients.

    Also to me OnApp and SolusVM are becoming even more entwined, which I do not think is good.

    Pst... wheres v2 in all of this new OnApp for Solus?

  • @Quadcone said:
    They have some sample prices out. http://www2.onapp.com/sample-vsp-pricing.html


    Too expensive?

    It does depend on what you're looking for. We have 50+ locations available in the marketplace, consisting of many different infrastructure types. The examples listed are for the real high-end stuff. If you're marketing towards less mission critical use, then there will also be locations suited for your market, at lower costs. If you get in touch, we can help provide more sample marketplace pricing.

    @wych said:
    OnApp_Terry stop trying to add a marketing spin onto your product and actually read what drserver said.

    Sorry, trying to provide an applicable use case, of how providers can use this product. You know, if you have all the CAPEX required to purchase multiple infrastructure types, in many different locations -- we'd love to talk to you about being an infrastructure provider. For those that don't have that kind of money (... and this will be most hosting companies), then that's who this is targeting.

    One such idea I was thinking about, is there are multiple hosting companies out there, like VPS.NET, Site5, and so on, offering many different locations, for both shared & cloud. To start a new location, it's a pretty heavy hit on the pocket book, especially when you don't have any clients on that infrastructure at launch. Using this model, you could easily start to offer hosting into a new location, and as your client base and demand builds, you can deploy your own infrastructure.

    Thanked by 1Cloudcone
  • wychwych Member
    edited September 2015

    OnApp_Terry said: and as your client base and demand builds, you can deploy your own infrastructure.

    What with IP changes and downtime during migrations? Yeah I am sure customers will love that.

    Another quirk for example; how would the node provider inform any resold clients of maintenance whilst also being whitelabeled for example or is that a chain message > host > reseller > client?

    Maybe I am like Ant and just don't see what place this has. OnApp sure, just seems like Solus and Onapp they are more entwined. A Virtualization panel shouldn't need to manage leasing new locations, it should manage the slave nodes and virtual servers contained.

    On another angle what stops someone with no infrastructure buying in and just using other hosts servers; or is this what you hope for? Why use datacentres direct when it can go through this?

    Edit:

    Just for clarity I am not spitting any venom here, just my feedback as I see it, I certainly don't understand the requirement for it to be solusvm linked.

    Pretty much took the words out of my mouth.

  • drserverdrserver Member, Host Rep

    @OnApp_Terry

    What if my customers who demand some level of quality end on GreenValueHost type deployment ?

    Thanked by 1wych
  • @wych said:
    What with IP changes and downtime during migrations? Yeah I am sure customers will love that.

    Remember, this is a variable cost, so you're only paying for what you using. This allows you to be extremely flexible in the way you manage your services & infrastructure.

    Another quirk for example; how would the node provider inform any resold clients of maintenance whilst also being whitelabeled for example or is that a chain message > host > reseller > client?

    Correct, they're still your client, so you would be responsible for communicating maintenance to them.

  • ditlevditlev Member, Top Host, Host Rep
    edited September 2015

    I actually agree with you guys - a lot of LET and SolusVM clients are extremely price sensitive in their go to market strategies. Others though - the large portion of solus clients that does not hang out at LET, are using it for higher end solutions or at very large scale - and not for $3/mo vm's.

    We obviously love both parts of the market, and my own hosting background is very much in the mass market segment.

    Though these federation deals are not always super attractive from a pricing perspective unless you start comparing them with AWS, GCE or Azure etc - and even then it's not actually a price comparison function we've build. That's not our intention at all.

    :)
    D

    Thanked by 2AnthonySmith Dylan
  • @drserver said:
    OnApp_Terry

    What if my customers who demand some level of quality end on GreenValueHost type deployment ?

    This is why the historical performance and reliability information is completely transparent. You're given every bit of possible data that we can provide, and if you have more questions, we're building a method for you to communicate directly with the infrastructure provider.

  • wychwych Member
    edited September 2015

    @OnApp_Terry said:
    Remember, this is a variable cost, so you're only paying for what you using. This allows you to be extremely flexible in the way you manage your services & infrastructure unless at their request.

    I couldn't care less about the cost, my client that wants his box on from the day of deployment to day of cancellation wont want the IP to change or downtime during the migration.

    OnApp_Terry said: Correct, they're still your client, so you would be responsible for communicating maintenance to them.

    And if it is not on my node how do I find out when this may be carried out/occur? Does the infastructure owner mail me, OnApp who?

    OnApp_Terry said: we're building a method for you to communicate directly with the infrastructure provider.

    Building? Not built? As per above point if the infa crapped out for some reason can I even contact the owner?

Sign In or Register to comment.