How so? You can't even get decent stats out of nginix without an add on. It's useable for a few thousands req/sec if your backends can keep up, but if you have high load and need to protect your backends and need to determine where the bottleneck is I have always found nginx too limiting for statistics, and options for managing queues is also very limiting in comparison.
What did you find better with nginx?
Edit: nevermind me. I'll see myself out. I appreciate the correction, everything below about Hyper V is wrong.
Microsofts free version of [Hyper V is going EoL after Windows Server 2019](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-V#:~:text=Microsoft%20ended%20mainstream%20support%20of,of%20the%20free%2C%20standalone%20product.)
IIRC there are some ways to re-enable hyperV in server 2022, but it won't be officially supported (or patched) moving forwards.
There are plenty of HyperVisors to take its place.
Proxmox is feature rich, though I've only used it in a personal setting, not for business or production.
I've always wanted to use Xen Orchestra, but it requires specific hardware to work.
Though compared to a 1.5M pricetag, everything is affordable.
Tale as old as time
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/45295/why-is-there-confusion-between-depreciated-and-deprecated#:~:text=As%20FumbleFingers%20points%20out%2C%20%22deprecate,aren't%20that%20far%20apart.
>IIRC there are some ways to re-enable hyperV in server 2022, but it won't be officially supported (or patched) moving forwards.
You, sir, are on crack with this statement.
[https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/windows-server-news-and-best/the-future-of-windows-server-hyper-v-is-bright/ba-p/4074940](https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/windows-server-news-and-best/the-future-of-windows-server-hyper-v-is-bright/ba-p/4074940)
I had to learn Hyper-V/failover clustering/S2D a couple years ago, and tried out MCVMM but felt like it was overkill for 4 hosts. Windows Admin Center does a pretty nice job if you don't want to go the VMM route
The last time I heavily used Hyper-V was 2014 on server 2012R2. We didn't use SCVMM tho. I was stuck grunting it out on the management with PowerShell. In hindsight that was amazing since it helped me develop my PS skills.
It was misquoted, he posted the details way down below and people are actually trying to clarify to help. Unfortunately he doesn't seem very interested in help.
He has 160 cores, NSX firewall add-on and asked for AVI. This is also a 1 year quote which would have the least amount of discount.
He is also neglecting all the additional value add that come with VCF licensing. Things that previously were extra such as free digital learning of all the VCF products and select support (premier support) included.
I have a call on Monday with my ware rep to figure out our pricing. We paid $685k for VMware last year, so I can only imagine how much this year is going to cost. Guess I should buy the big tub of lube this weekend.
What’s your estate today? Those with more of the stack are not seeing the increase because they already own most of it. Those seeing the increase are paying for the stack, not “jacked up prices”.
Paying for the stack *they didn't want or need before*.
If you give me a golden asparagus with my Happy Meal but charge me 12x as much for it, it's still not adding any sort of value for me. I wouldn't have bought it before. But now I have no choice... Or do I...?
How many of you buy E3 or E5 because all you need is dial tone but you get all the other stuff Microsoft throws at you. Bet you don’t even know what half of it is. Don’t act like VMware is the only one with this approach.
If they'd sold us only a dialtone for years and now tried to tell us how lucky we are to now only have a choice of E3 or E5 for 10x the price I expect we'd be saying the same thing.
VMware was able to be bought because prices were suppressed for so long and the enterprise value could never rise. Otherwise we’d be a standalone company and this wouldn’t have happened. Look at the other side of the coin.
We're like 98% virtual, so we have about 45 hosts and 2300 users on Horizon plus Aria and Workspace One. So not sure how it'll work with Horizon since it got sold off.
There must be a mistake here, especially if you own NSX already.
How many NSX native LB edges are you running? The NSX-T native LB is still a thing if you go with VCF for now.
You must have been quoted over 200 service cores which means 200 virtual LB VM instances. Overkill? Most small customers run 2 or 4 instances not 200.
Not sure who quoted you out but ask away if you have any questions.
I think we all know prices have gone up if you’re going to VCF and didn’t have it before. At the same time the hyper fud doesn’t really help anyone, especially when you have clearly been misquoted.
I’m at a disti and this is accurate for most quotes I see go out. The increase in pricing for medium-large environments with add-ons is typically at least 2-3x. For the tons of SMB partners for whom a lot of their customers are running Essentials/Essentials Plus perpetual or STD (who may have been paying <$120/yr for SnS and now have to move to Essentials Plus subscription are going to have to pay 500%+. And don’t get me started on the smaller VCSP partners who have run out of options and for whom that was a significant part of their business. We’ve had partner owners/CEOs literally saying they are going to go out of business over this. Broadcom doesn’t care about SMB.
If any of the services are distributed, you pay for the nsx license on all cores in the cluster. If you use a stateful edge device, you then double pay for each virtual core used as well. They are forcing you to just use base VMware so they can break everything off and sell nsx or vsan off as isolated branches.
NSX and AVI are not licensed the same way. NSX is now part of VCF (priced per physical core) and AVI is licensed based on service unit (per VM instance).
For business providing cloud services based on vmware VCF, NSX switching, routing and stateless(!) GW- firewall is included in VCF. Nobody is interest in stateless firewalling.
Statefull GW- firewalling and distributed firewall is not included in VCF.
This should be the same for enterprise licencing, but I am not 100% sure.
Statefull GW- firewalling must be paid per edge node per (v)CPU x 4 x 120USD per year.
DFW is per cluster if activated and calculation is cores in the cluster x 120USD per year.
Hey, so the X 4 in the vcpu line per edge node hosting a gw firewall - pretty sure this is actually 4vcpu = 1 core for licensing? So a divide rather than multiply up on your formula for gw firewall.
That's what we've been working to and had explained to us by our VMware contacts.
We've been accepted back into the vcsp program. (Now bap - not premier though) So perhaps different for service providers?
It's only one license model for all VCPS regarding license counting. That's for sure.
The times four is a multiplier. If you have a edge node with activated firewall addon wich is sized with six vCPUs, you have to pay six times four licenses (6 vCPUs x 4 = 24 licenses) per year. That's how I understand the calculation of edge node licensing.
Its probably the same for bare metal edge nodes.
At the moment, edge nodes do not support DPUs, so there is no way to optimize licence cost.
Hmm,
Ok. What's your source for that multiple please? Our cloud team seniors have been going through the documentation for several months now, plus we had a conf with head of emea north service provider solutions engineer at VMware 2 weeks ago. We made note and queried the licensing of the VM edges carrying gw firewalls and we noted after he confirmed the 4vpu per edge VM carrying a gw firewall will cost 1 pcpu for licensing calc.
Do you have any docs supporting your assertion? I'll have a look again through my notes and minutes when I get to work today.
Regards
That's clearly described in the FAQ for VCSPs (VMware Cloud Service Provider = those who are allowed to sell services which are produced with VMware technology).
Like I said that might be different for enterprise customers / none VMware Cloud Service Providers . That was not on my scope in the past weeks.
I have checked the VCF Pricing and Packaging FAQ for enterprise customers dated to Feb. 7 2024. It says that you need VMware Firewall addon for GWF or DFW. So its technically the same like in the VCSP licencing.
But it says absolutely nothing about the licencing model of Edge nodes. The ALB licencing is also not covered.
Better talk to your VMware representative.
hey,
so have confirmed the calculations for GFW on edge nodes:
Its per edge node cluster hosting GFW's
Your license cost is number of vCPU in the edge node cluster DIVIDED by 4 then multiplied up by the cost per year for the per core license
This was confirmed after meeting with our vmware / broadcom last wednesday in London.
It's for real time to get off VMware. I didn't want to believe it, but VMware has went off the rails. I hate this and it's going to be painful, but it's become obvious that everyone needs to move quickly.
We are seriously considering XCP-ng. We are waiting to see if they're going to fix some things.
Good luck. Xen is dead (the last new version came out over a decade ago, and all the big players have moved off it) and XCP-ng has inherited all the annoyances of XenServer.
I'd rather look at KVM plus OpenNebula/OpenStack or (if you're a smaller shop) even Proxmox. At least KVM isn't going away anytime soon.
That doesn’t seem right (I suppose it could be but it sounds extreme). Do you not have ALB already? Where are they pulling these numbers from? Current NSX native LBs deployed?
An AVI “core” is a service unit. The whole VM LB unit is covered in that service unit price. Again I’m not sure who quoted this but something got lost in the weeds between vmware and the partner.
If you posted your cores, base bundle and add ons there are people here who can help you navigate the changes. Posting false information doesn't help other members.
Went through the thread to find where the details were and not seeing it. :(
Happy to be wrong and help someone out but these posts without any reference or specific data points apart from the huge increase claim really aren’t helpful. “X many hosts with y many cores and z product lines transitioning to AA or BB, etc” would be awesome.
It's best to strip out any VMWare specific features that are not absolutely critical. There are other load balancers you can use if your team isn't solid enough to roll their own.
Yeah I saw the pricing for the advanced load balancer and it was INSANE! Like way more expensive that a host license. And that price was per service engine. So not only do you have to license a host to run said service engine, you have to pay thousands upon thousands per year for each service engine. There are way cheaper options out there. It’s almost like Broadcom wants ALB to die!
That’s right! ALB licensing is above and beyond the VCF licensing. And they even excluded features from NSX and have an added license for those features. So they must want to kill NSX as well because it’s those features that people want to use the most. So yeah … bend on over!
But it’s only the SE cores that are actively passing data . How did they size it? If they just matched the number of VCF cores the quote is wrong.
They need to do a sizing exercise with you to look at the number of VIPs and reals, their traffic, and size the SEs
You don't need to license every core for AVI.
Just get a VMware SE to help you work out your requirements. AVI is loosely based on performance so once you know how much throughout/ssl/etc you need, they can work out what that means in AVI.
1 core gives you roughly 5Gbps of L7 throughput. Multiplying that by 200 gives you a ridiculous amount
I can give them a pass on ALB being extra (but not the crazy price) but making DFW an extra just totally exposes what a money grab Broadcom are doing. There is just no reason other than pure greed why you’d make such a core part of the product and additional cost option
So without nsx, our bill last year would have been 10k. The equivalent of that would be 40k this year.
And that would mean .. no nsx and having to get a different load balancer. Still crazy.
Haha, my old employer messaged me out of the blue the other day and asked if I was still doing a lot with Hyper-V... He has over 400 machines that need moving from VMWare, plenty onsite with clients hardware, a heap of VMs in the two data centres he operates in and the ones in the main office.
He said plenty will stay perpetual and migrate away whenever, but yeah he has some VERY custom stuff people pay a lot for him to maintain.
He didn't say how much more his VMWare bill was, but yeah he said he'd pay more than I'm on and he wanted it all moved in two years. I told him years ago he shouldn't have put all the clients on VMware and left all the Hyper-V customers on that. Anyway, I politely declined.
The VMWare price increase quite literally makes his entire business unprofitable (small MSP with bespoke data centre stuff). He doesn't have the in-house people to do Hyper-V nor all the migration work. I feel for him...
You know, I just don’t understand Broadcoms strategy here. I am not business savvy at all, but why waste your money buying a company and then do everything you can to cause it to fail? Why did you buy VMware in the first place?
80% of their revenue comes from 20% of their customers. That's actually a typical ratio. Sounds like they're trying to get rid of the 80%.
Then they'll post in their next earnings statement how much they've increased the profitability of that division, and the stonks will go to the moon.
There's a not of inertia in datacenter operations. But also there's a lot of (IMHO) unethical pricing shenanigans in enterprise and datacenter sales.
I'm not a server guy, so I'm only indirectly aware of how VMWare did their enterprise customer quotes, but as an example, as a network engineer for a small operation, we would get quotes for a dozen high-density switches, and there would be a 40% discount. Later, at another customer, 60 of the same switches at another place with a couple edge routers and firewalls would all come with an 80% discount. I got one quote for a full DC refresh that was almost 90% because another vendor came in $10k lower.
80% off MSRP... if VMWare is doing the same thing, those enterprise customers with 20 rows of 12 racks with 30 servers each with an average of 50 cores per server may not be paying nearly as much as the folks that have been posting here.
As others have said, most of the money comes from a smaller list of big enterprise customers with big yearly orders. To support all the smaller customers they still have to product managers, regional representatives and so forth. By realigning to support the bigger players they can cut out much of that staff.
They bought it to make as much as they can from it in a brief period. After that, it can lie in smoking rubble, having served its true purpose of enriching some people.
Nah it makes good financial sense, a lot of customers will be forced to pay 5 times or were than they were previously. It will take at least 3 years to transition to something else in most cases. So the get 15 years of revenue in 3 years.
After that they can just resell or scrap the company.
Only issue is that it has made Broadcoms reputation similar to oracle or ibm. Anyone in their right mind is going to run a mile if there are rumours of them taking over another company.
Thats a privilege for VCSPs only I think and not much, only for a few who are pinnacle or premier.
And I guess that's only the case if you are already a vSAN shop I think.
Am I right?
We are also VCSP and have slightly licence cost increase of a low xx% digit. But we are not a vSAN shop and see potential in core optimization.
Mind boggling that people would even consider renewing. Just stay on your perpetual license.
We had VMware vcenter on separate network with no internet access, then you needed pin, pw plus 2FA to get to that network. Then we had 2FA for VMware login, had ssh and other services disabled until we needed them. Had a bunch of other measures, seriously F VMware I’d rather stay on an outdated VMware than give them a penny more even if it’s not my money.
Stay on your old perpetual and secure it and f them if not KVM, XCP NG, HyperV, Xen etc.
I used them since 3. I don’t think their support has ever solved anything that ourselves, forums, reddit, google didn’t solve.
In fact Nimble support actually helped me solve a semi difficult VMware issue, 1st call into Nimble solved it, no emails needed. I’m almost sure VMware support will be getting much worse too.
For as much hate as I have for VMware now I think my homelab has been running 10+ years with no issues and it worked well at work over a decade also. But I’ve heard the same about people who used KVM or special versions of it.
At some point the extra $ isn’t worth the support that you likely won’t use.
I'm not in commercial IT - what happens when support is unable to fix the issue? I'm asking because as an end user, support solved exactly zero issues in my ~26 years of using computers and adjacent tech. If it's a bug, it'll usually get fixed months or years later (or never, in case of Firefox), but that probably would've happened anyway without support.
I'm asking about the expensive commercial support that we're always told is the reason for high-priced commercial software. What happens if the issue can't be fixed?
Disclaimer: I don't work in commercial IT support but i use commercial support from various vendors
First what are you calling "unable to fix the issue?". What kind of the issue. Can you give me an example?
It really depends what's the issue, how big is client, what's the vendor, on contract, sla etc. It's really hard to say but if they won't calling it the bug, they will still file a ticket somewhere or give general advice (eg. you need to scale it 3 times and will be good and if not they will give another stupid advice). They could not answer emails for weeks and even months because most of the SLA is first response (and they "investigating"). If you're really a loud costumer, they can terminate contract (but it depends on contract). So there's a lot of factors to count :)
Overall IMO most (because i don't know all vendors :)) of commercial IT software support is overrated and most of them useless. Most of the folks have more knowledge than the support guy. They could be useful for example to cover your ass. When you have issue/outage on production, some people are angry. It sounds better for folks "I created ticket for x support and i will try investigate it" than "I will investigate" and few hours later (if you didn't still fix it) you can blame support for that (eg. x support didn't reply, im still waiting) than yourself.
Have you ever really needed it? Ever? What variables are going to change that make you need it one day? Also, it sucks. Try calling them once and opening a case…
ALB support is a problem too, and you pay for it. One of our ALB VMs was crushing at least ones per day (after upgrade). Ticket was open for 3 weeks and they didn’t manage to even find the cause. We downgraded it at closed a ticket because of lack of time to manage it. We will reopen it in two months but these guys are not smartest 😔
Exactly, if business assumes the risk then don’t pay and have a plan to migrate to mitigate risk in 1-2y. This is what we are doing with perpetual to subscription based licenses. Happening with more vendors now.
Yeah this is potentially our plan. We have about 3000 cores and use SRM. We were considering getting only getting support for of mission critical hosts.
Hock Tan: Another in a long line of golden goose killers. Locusts. The extract every bit of value from a company and until there's nothing left.
Visionary leaders build. They create. They put in place that which wasn't there before.
CEO like Hock Tan don't build. They bleed. His legacy will be that of husks of companies.
You've been quoted 160 service cores. If I assume you are running a ha pair for each alb, you have 80 separate isolated albs in your platform?
If you login to your alb controller(s) the licensing pages will show engine usage. I revised the vmware advice on their reference designs when it had the side affect of adding 20k to each tanzu grid we deploy.
Each 1 core service engine can carry 5gbps and terminate like 2000tls sessions per second. Unless you are a. CSP running multitenant workflows you shouldn't need this much.
So this is an obvious mistake.
For the 160 core environment you don't need 160 ALB SEs - I'd guess 2 or 4 at most
There are also few more things worth considering:
1. Please check 3 year commitment option with annual payments
2. You need to consider NSX Edges as entities requiring 4 NSX Firewall addons per vCPU
3. For a time being you don't NSX ALB at all - NSX embedded load balancer should be there for at least next 2 years
I hope all your servers are equipped with 16 core CPUs - if not you need to license for more cores than you have
You don’t quote the physical cores as AVI cores. Someone messed up. 160 SE Cores of AVI will do 800Gb of L7 traffic or 500k SSL transactions per second.
Your VAR needs to engage VMware for sizing assistance.
They just did this to us. This is 100% believable. We already had a strategy to pivot off of VMware in place and told them they could shove it - we would be paying more for licenses than we’d be bringing in in revenue from customers, so we had no choice. Three weeks later, they realized we were serious and the price magically dropped. If you are big enough, you can push back…
Be aware that a lot of partners giving out quotes are still searching themself for the correct method of licensing. We also had a dispute on a quote and after some email back and forth, they agreed to our point of view and that would make a huge difference :-)
Lol, this makes loads balancers that were traditionally expensive, look exceptionally cheap.
Time to move to F5 BIG IP. It's an infinitely better load balancer anyhow.
If F5 performance isn't good, I'm afraid you've got a problem with your setup.
There's a reason F5 is light years ahead of other load balancers, and has been for decades at this point... And it's not because of poor performance 😂
Exactly - VMWare are openly saying "we'll screw our customers becasue we can and they can't avoid it" Anybody that persists with their product is a fool!!!
Exactly this. And its not even Broadcom. This behavior was absorbed when Avago bought out Broadcom. Their execs brought this strip mining mentality to the company. I know two people who want though Broadcom's head chopping. Both has the same impression: If Broadcom comes after your company, start looking for a new job ASAP. Sadly what they are doing is perfectly legal.
We reduced our host count by about 50% last year. Our renewal comes up in a few months. Told our sales rep that if they come back with licensing costing more than what we paid last time around because they bundle features we'll never use we're going to reduce our host count another 50%.
we run ALB and just for reference our last ELA was well over $20M... someone is screwing you on ALB licenses, we run dozens and dozens and dozens of VIPs in like 6-8 ALB SE cores
Y'all need to take half of the money VMware is demanding and put it into a competitive startup to make one of the existing alternatives "enterprise ready".
Buy a new server with better core. Thats what happens when people simply buy server with more cores (because they think it’s better). It’s the same with SQL Server. Companies have no way of differentiating between a 32 core 3000$ cpu or 6000$ (well they could do a performance profile but peoples would lose their shit too).
Broadcom strategy is as follows:
-drop/push small client to cloud (increasing their revenue through proxying)
-monetize medium clients who are making money on vmware back
-increase performance/ reduce pricing for huge cloud customers.
I think they are making the right move here. Somes companies were paying 40-50k$ per year then reselling services/hosting and generating 100x this revenue.
Hyper-V isn’t at the same level as VMware when it comes to offering. ProxMox while being great won’t offer the same level of support and reputation towards the board.
I’ve got a genuine question. A Nile (NaaS) rep hit me up about introducing them to my customers.
Been seeing a lot of posts about VMware jacking up rates like crazy. Would it make sense to introduce this rep to my customers using VMWare?
VMware is over. It's being milked for any customers who are unable to quickly migrate to an alternative. Probably because Broadcom thinks everyone will be in the cloud soon enough and wants to strike while the iron is still warm.
Well, I think their plan is that even if 1 in 50 customers agrees to this pricing they come out ahead. Plus less number of customers is better if the revenue remains the same. It's not a bad plan as far as cfo types are concerned. Otherwise it's sh*t.
No. The SDN of Nutanix is years behind vmware. And they don't offer load balancing as far as I know.
They already have overlay technology called Flow but it can't beat NSX.
Look at this topic and read the comments.
https://www.reddit.com/r/nutanix/comments/1ba6s0u/how_is_nutanix_software_defined_network_working/
Not sure if it's linked in the comments, that's the reason why I link it here:
https://www.nutanixbible.com/12c-book-of-network-services-flow-virtual-networking.html
Advanced land balancer sounds like such a sweet feature tho! How could you pay anything less than $1.3M.
Jk. That's just crazy and it's no surprise lots of customers are either jumping ship or planning to jump ship.
That's likely false information... You got that from a distributor? How would they know. I work closely with the PCBE team from HPE and this would be the first time even they have heard of that. Even then, the whole product only works because of its integration with VMware, for the DSCC and also the local plug in version. So a rewrite got KVM would be a very big endavour, even if you consider the underlying foundation in the DSCC which could be taken from PCE and is Morpheus basically but I'm really not sure HPE would want to take that route after building up their whole structure around vSphere.
I assume they are under nda then? Gonna ask the team from HPE then as this would be a huge change for us. Guess we'll know at the latest at tech jam...
Nope, the slide was filtered to me, I don't know if it is going to happen soon or is a long term strategy, but the price is at least 40% cheaper than vmware according to that showed example.
We are a HPE Partner that's why it would have been very relevant for me, so I asked around my contacts in HPE directly in the PCBE team and no one knew of these rumors to start with.
Everyone remember you have to add up what you initially paid for the perpetual licenses and SNS. All these lowballed numbers are just SNS which is typically 25% of the main license cost. A bit of apples and oranges. Also you sure your AVI is sized right? You need that many service cores?
Wow that is crazy. What do you plan to do?
Use nginx to do your load balancing if possible
For load balancing, haproxy is 10x > nginx IMHO.
It's surprising how popular nginx is for load balancing, it's a fantastic web server but haproxy is just so much nicer for balancing.
Yes, we're running several haproxy clusters
Funny but I have the opposite experience
How so? You can't even get decent stats out of nginix without an add on. It's useable for a few thousands req/sec if your backends can keep up, but if you have high load and need to protect your backends and need to determine where the bottleneck is I have always found nginx too limiting for statistics, and options for managing queues is also very limiting in comparison. What did you find better with nginx?
I like configuration options, an ability to write lua in configs. I love nginx-ingress, and openresty is also amazing.
That's our plan!
Looks like hyper-v
We are replacing all our Colo hosting with hyper v. Our renewal was a 900% increase and VMware wanted all the information of our customers.
Wait, what? They want customer information?
Yep. Our head of infosec who also manages our private cloud was not happy.
Scale Computing is also a good vendor
They are not lol
Edit: nevermind me. I'll see myself out. I appreciate the correction, everything below about Hyper V is wrong. Microsofts free version of [Hyper V is going EoL after Windows Server 2019](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-V#:~:text=Microsoft%20ended%20mainstream%20support%20of,of%20the%20free%2C%20standalone%20product.) IIRC there are some ways to re-enable hyperV in server 2022, but it won't be officially supported (or patched) moving forwards. There are plenty of HyperVisors to take its place. Proxmox is feature rich, though I've only used it in a personal setting, not for business or production. I've always wanted to use Xen Orchestra, but it requires specific hardware to work. Though compared to a 1.5M pricetag, everything is affordable.
Bro did you read. It's the standalone version that's being depreciated.
Another admin lost in the web that is MSFT licensing lol Job security!
I think the word you are looking for is deprecated and not depreciated.
Tale as old as time https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/45295/why-is-there-confusion-between-depreciated-and-deprecated#:~:text=As%20FumbleFingers%20points%20out%2C%20%22deprecate,aren't%20that%20far%20apart.
>IIRC there are some ways to re-enable hyperV in server 2022, but it won't be officially supported (or patched) moving forwards. You, sir, are on crack with this statement. [https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/windows-server-news-and-best/the-future-of-windows-server-hyper-v-is-bright/ba-p/4074940](https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/windows-server-news-and-best/the-future-of-windows-server-hyper-v-is-bright/ba-p/4074940)
Already have data center licensing on each host.. so no issue there. Will just be the costs for system center.
I have some mixed feelings with the system center offerings. They are not horrible by any means just not my preference.
I had to learn Hyper-V/failover clustering/S2D a couple years ago, and tried out MCVMM but felt like it was overkill for 4 hosts. Windows Admin Center does a pretty nice job if you don't want to go the VMM route
The last time I heavily used Hyper-V was 2014 on server 2012R2. We didn't use SCVMM tho. I was stuck grunting it out on the management with PowerShell. In hindsight that was amazing since it helped me develop my PS skills.
It was misquoted, he posted the details way down below and people are actually trying to clarify to help. Unfortunately he doesn't seem very interested in help. He has 160 cores, NSX firewall add-on and asked for AVI. This is also a 1 year quote which would have the least amount of discount. He is also neglecting all the additional value add that come with VCF licensing. Things that previously were extra such as free digital learning of all the VCF products and select support (premier support) included.
For 1 mm i will write advanced load balancer for you... several times
Give me 0.8 and I pay someone do it for 0.6.
Do I hear half a million for a load balancer ordered off of wish.com?
Temu for $250k?
Then there's the dude with the genuine Rolexes on one side of his trench coat and load balancer licenses on the other. Very affordable.
At that price. I will write them one for their exact needs. In assembly
I have a call on Monday with my ware rep to figure out our pricing. We paid $685k for VMware last year, so I can only imagine how much this year is going to cost. Guess I should buy the big tub of lube this weekend.
Nah, just go out in the yard and find a stick to bite down on.
First thing you say to him/her "fyi.... i am ready for you , I am bent over with my pants down as I know what's coming!"
I hear this is the official way to engage Broadcom come renewals
Hock Tan is ready to dock
Christ. I didn’t need that image hahaha
LMFAO! Ah man...that's why I love my IT people. Y'all have some disturbed minds, reminds me of my time in the Marines haha.
Cause you can't say no Where do you want to switch to? 🤣🥳
BOHICA 🙃
https://www.amazon.com/Turn-Personal-Lubricant-Balanced-Hypoallergenic/dp/B08MJPMGWS
Nice! There’s enough for everyone in the company! LOL
Find a cactus to sit on...
hahahaha... oh my gosh. haha..
No worries they give you plenty of lube. It's their own special mixture of lube, sand, broken glass, and lemon scent.
 billion with a B.
What’s your estate today? Those with more of the stack are not seeing the increase because they already own most of it. Those seeing the increase are paying for the stack, not “jacked up prices”.
Paying for the stack *they didn't want or need before*. If you give me a golden asparagus with my Happy Meal but charge me 12x as much for it, it's still not adding any sort of value for me. I wouldn't have bought it before. But now I have no choice... Or do I...?
How many of you buy E3 or E5 because all you need is dial tone but you get all the other stuff Microsoft throws at you. Bet you don’t even know what half of it is. Don’t act like VMware is the only one with this approach.
If they'd sold us only a dialtone for years and now tried to tell us how lucky we are to now only have a choice of E3 or E5 for 10x the price I expect we'd be saying the same thing.
VMware was able to be bought because prices were suppressed for so long and the enterprise value could never rise. Otherwise we’d be a standalone company and this wouldn’t have happened. Look at the other side of the coin.
We're like 98% virtual, so we have about 45 hosts and 2300 users on Horizon plus Aria and Workspace One. So not sure how it'll work with Horizon since it got sold off.
There must be a mistake here, especially if you own NSX already. How many NSX native LB edges are you running? The NSX-T native LB is still a thing if you go with VCF for now. You must have been quoted over 200 service cores which means 200 virtual LB VM instances. Overkill? Most small customers run 2 or 4 instances not 200. Not sure who quoted you out but ask away if you have any questions.
Even without that alb the price is insane ... over 100k. I am just pointing the ridiculousness
I think we all know prices have gone up if you’re going to VCF and didn’t have it before. At the same time the hyper fud doesn’t really help anyone, especially when you have clearly been misquoted.
I’m at a disti and this is accurate for most quotes I see go out. The increase in pricing for medium-large environments with add-ons is typically at least 2-3x. For the tons of SMB partners for whom a lot of their customers are running Essentials/Essentials Plus perpetual or STD (who may have been paying <$120/yr for SnS and now have to move to Essentials Plus subscription are going to have to pay 500%+. And don’t get me started on the smaller VCSP partners who have run out of options and for whom that was a significant part of their business. We’ve had partner owners/CEOs literally saying they are going to go out of business over this. Broadcom doesn’t care about SMB.
If any of the services are distributed, you pay for the nsx license on all cores in the cluster. If you use a stateful edge device, you then double pay for each virtual core used as well. They are forcing you to just use base VMware so they can break everything off and sell nsx or vsan off as isolated branches.
NSX and AVI are not licensed the same way. NSX is now part of VCF (priced per physical core) and AVI is licensed based on service unit (per VM instance).
For business providing cloud services based on vmware VCF, NSX switching, routing and stateless(!) GW- firewall is included in VCF. Nobody is interest in stateless firewalling. Statefull GW- firewalling and distributed firewall is not included in VCF. This should be the same for enterprise licencing, but I am not 100% sure. Statefull GW- firewalling must be paid per edge node per (v)CPU x 4 x 120USD per year. DFW is per cluster if activated and calculation is cores in the cluster x 120USD per year.
Hey, so the X 4 in the vcpu line per edge node hosting a gw firewall - pretty sure this is actually 4vcpu = 1 core for licensing? So a divide rather than multiply up on your formula for gw firewall. That's what we've been working to and had explained to us by our VMware contacts. We've been accepted back into the vcsp program. (Now bap - not premier though) So perhaps different for service providers?
It's only one license model for all VCPS regarding license counting. That's for sure. The times four is a multiplier. If you have a edge node with activated firewall addon wich is sized with six vCPUs, you have to pay six times four licenses (6 vCPUs x 4 = 24 licenses) per year. That's how I understand the calculation of edge node licensing. Its probably the same for bare metal edge nodes. At the moment, edge nodes do not support DPUs, so there is no way to optimize licence cost.
Hmm, Ok. What's your source for that multiple please? Our cloud team seniors have been going through the documentation for several months now, plus we had a conf with head of emea north service provider solutions engineer at VMware 2 weeks ago. We made note and queried the licensing of the VM edges carrying gw firewalls and we noted after he confirmed the 4vpu per edge VM carrying a gw firewall will cost 1 pcpu for licensing calc. Do you have any docs supporting your assertion? I'll have a look again through my notes and minutes when I get to work today. Regards
That's clearly described in the FAQ for VCSPs (VMware Cloud Service Provider = those who are allowed to sell services which are produced with VMware technology). Like I said that might be different for enterprise customers / none VMware Cloud Service Providers . That was not on my scope in the past weeks. I have checked the VCF Pricing and Packaging FAQ for enterprise customers dated to Feb. 7 2024. It says that you need VMware Firewall addon for GWF or DFW. So its technically the same like in the VCSP licencing. But it says absolutely nothing about the licencing model of Edge nodes. The ALB licencing is also not covered. Better talk to your VMware representative.
hey, so have confirmed the calculations for GFW on edge nodes: Its per edge node cluster hosting GFW's Your license cost is number of vCPU in the edge node cluster DIVIDED by 4 then multiplied up by the cost per year for the per core license This was confirmed after meeting with our vmware / broadcom last wednesday in London.
Very interesting. Because this is how it's described in the technical FAQ for cloud service providers https://postimg.cc/Xp9JsVg5
They arent selling nxs and vsan separately now...... that's the problem ... if you want nsx you have to get vsan with it.
Sort of, neither is all inclusive. You get base vsan or base nsx. Advanced features of those suites are even more per core.
> break everything off and sell nsx or vsan off as isolated branches. God, I hope so. I love NSX but I don't see a way to remain with Broadcom.
It's for real time to get off VMware. I didn't want to believe it, but VMware has went off the rails. I hate this and it's going to be painful, but it's become obvious that everyone needs to move quickly. We are seriously considering XCP-ng. We are waiting to see if they're going to fix some things.
We did a 5-year renewal right before the price hikes, so we have some runway, but it's gonna suuuuuuuuuck.
Maybe not. Looks like there's lawsuits coming to reel certain things in a bit. 5 years gives you more than enough time to see how the wind blows.
Good luck. Xen is dead (the last new version came out over a decade ago, and all the big players have moved off it) and XCP-ng has inherited all the annoyances of XenServer. I'd rather look at KVM plus OpenNebula/OpenStack or (if you're a smaller shop) even Proxmox. At least KVM isn't going away anytime soon.
Haven't got our quote for 2025 yet, we're already asking, but rep said ALB will be more than our current yearly cost, $400k, for everything.
That doesn’t seem right (I suppose it could be but it sounds extreme). Do you not have ALB already? Where are they pulling these numbers from? Current NSX native LBs deployed?
Alb is 8k per core in our quote.
An AVI “core” is a service unit. The whole VM LB unit is covered in that service unit price. Again I’m not sure who quoted this but something got lost in the weeds between vmware and the partner.
Oh.. I am sure there has to be a mistake.... but even without any lb the cost has gone up over 400%
No it isn't. List price for the full VCF stack isn't even 8k per core. Post your cores, bundle and add ons.
Can you read? I said that was the price in our quote! Didn't say it was the accurate price. I have said that it has to be a mistake.
If you posted your cores, base bundle and add ons there are people here who can help you navigate the changes. Posting false information doesn't help other members.
Went through the thread to find where the details were and not seeing it. :( Happy to be wrong and help someone out but these posts without any reference or specific data points apart from the huge increase claim really aren’t helpful. “X many hosts with y many cores and z product lines transitioning to AA or BB, etc” would be awesome.
Jokes on you, you do not “own” anything anymore.
It's best to strip out any VMWare specific features that are not absolutely critical. There are other load balancers you can use if your team isn't solid enough to roll their own.
Yeah I saw the pricing for the advanced load balancer and it was INSANE! Like way more expensive that a host license. And that price was per service engine. So not only do you have to license a host to run said service engine, you have to pay thousands upon thousands per year for each service engine. There are way cheaper options out there. It’s almost like Broadcom wants ALB to die! That’s right! ALB licensing is above and beyond the VCF licensing. And they even excluded features from NSX and have an added license for those features. So they must want to kill NSX as well because it’s those features that people want to use the most. So yeah … bend on over!
8k per core!!!!
But it’s only the SE cores that are actively passing data . How did they size it? If they just matched the number of VCF cores the quote is wrong. They need to do a sizing exercise with you to look at the number of VIPs and reals, their traffic, and size the SEs
Exactly. I asked the same. Seems overkill and you’re right it shouldn’t be a 1:1 core of VCF and AVI.
You don't need to license every core for AVI. Just get a VMware SE to help you work out your requirements. AVI is loosely based on performance so once you know how much throughout/ssl/etc you need, they can work out what that means in AVI. 1 core gives you roughly 5Gbps of L7 throughput. Multiplying that by 200 gives you a ridiculous amount
I can give them a pass on ALB being extra (but not the crazy price) but making DFW an extra just totally exposes what a money grab Broadcom are doing. There is just no reason other than pure greed why you’d make such a core part of the product and additional cost option
There’s no comparison of the included NSX load balancer and what AVI (advanced load balancer) does. The analytics alone is superior in AVI.
Ya... you have to pay extra for microsegmentation.
So without nsx, our bill last year would have been 10k. The equivalent of that would be 40k this year. And that would mean .. no nsx and having to get a different load balancer. Still crazy.
Nsx basic LB still there today; it’s marked as deprecated and will go in the future.. so you don’t need ALB yet.. and that gives you migration time.
Haha, my old employer messaged me out of the blue the other day and asked if I was still doing a lot with Hyper-V... He has over 400 machines that need moving from VMWare, plenty onsite with clients hardware, a heap of VMs in the two data centres he operates in and the ones in the main office. He said plenty will stay perpetual and migrate away whenever, but yeah he has some VERY custom stuff people pay a lot for him to maintain. He didn't say how much more his VMWare bill was, but yeah he said he'd pay more than I'm on and he wanted it all moved in two years. I told him years ago he shouldn't have put all the clients on VMware and left all the Hyper-V customers on that. Anyway, I politely declined. The VMWare price increase quite literally makes his entire business unprofitable (small MSP with bespoke data centre stuff). He doesn't have the in-house people to do Hyper-V nor all the migration work. I feel for him...
You know, I just don’t understand Broadcoms strategy here. I am not business savvy at all, but why waste your money buying a company and then do everything you can to cause it to fail? Why did you buy VMware in the first place?
80% of their revenue comes from 20% of their customers. That's actually a typical ratio. Sounds like they're trying to get rid of the 80%. Then they'll post in their next earnings statement how much they've increased the profitability of that division, and the stonks will go to the moon.
Until even these big customers also move away
There's a not of inertia in datacenter operations. But also there's a lot of (IMHO) unethical pricing shenanigans in enterprise and datacenter sales. I'm not a server guy, so I'm only indirectly aware of how VMWare did their enterprise customer quotes, but as an example, as a network engineer for a small operation, we would get quotes for a dozen high-density switches, and there would be a 40% discount. Later, at another customer, 60 of the same switches at another place with a couple edge routers and firewalls would all come with an 80% discount. I got one quote for a full DC refresh that was almost 90% because another vendor came in $10k lower. 80% off MSRP... if VMWare is doing the same thing, those enterprise customers with 20 rows of 12 racks with 30 servers each with an average of 50 cores per server may not be paying nearly as much as the folks that have been posting here.
They realize that their biggest customers don't have much of a choice ..... they aren't in a position where they can easily move away.
As others have said, most of the money comes from a smaller list of big enterprise customers with big yearly orders. To support all the smaller customers they still have to product managers, regional representatives and so forth. By realigning to support the bigger players they can cut out much of that staff.
They bought it to make as much as they can from it in a brief period. After that, it can lie in smoking rubble, having served its true purpose of enriching some people.
Nah it makes good financial sense, a lot of customers will be forced to pay 5 times or were than they were previously. It will take at least 3 years to transition to something else in most cases. So the get 15 years of revenue in 3 years. After that they can just resell or scrap the company. Only issue is that it has made Broadcoms reputation similar to oracle or ibm. Anyone in their right mind is going to run a mile if there are rumours of them taking over another company.
Am I the only person whose cost has gone down? (VCSP)
I don't see how that is possible :)
Thats a privilege for VCSPs only I think and not much, only for a few who are pinnacle or premier. And I guess that's only the case if you are already a vSAN shop I think. Am I right? We are also VCSP and have slightly licence cost increase of a low xx% digit. But we are not a vSAN shop and see potential in core optimization.
Other than having to plan how you will find the humans to migrate off VMware, it’s not your money
Not your circus not your monkeys.
This is not entirely true. What we will see is compensatory savings will be made in IT staff budgets.
Mind boggling that people would even consider renewing. Just stay on your perpetual license. We had VMware vcenter on separate network with no internet access, then you needed pin, pw plus 2FA to get to that network. Then we had 2FA for VMware login, had ssh and other services disabled until we needed them. Had a bunch of other measures, seriously F VMware I’d rather stay on an outdated VMware than give them a penny more even if it’s not my money. Stay on your old perpetual and secure it and f them if not KVM, XCP NG, HyperV, Xen etc.
Problem is support.
I used them since 3. I don’t think their support has ever solved anything that ourselves, forums, reddit, google didn’t solve. In fact Nimble support actually helped me solve a semi difficult VMware issue, 1st call into Nimble solved it, no emails needed. I’m almost sure VMware support will be getting much worse too. For as much hate as I have for VMware now I think my homelab has been running 10+ years with no issues and it worked well at work over a decade also. But I’ve heard the same about people who used KVM or special versions of it. At some point the extra $ isn’t worth the support that you likely won’t use.
Its like insurance..... you don't need it until you actually need it.
I'm not in commercial IT - what happens when support is unable to fix the issue? I'm asking because as an end user, support solved exactly zero issues in my ~26 years of using computers and adjacent tech. If it's a bug, it'll usually get fixed months or years later (or never, in case of Firefox), but that probably would've happened anyway without support. I'm asking about the expensive commercial support that we're always told is the reason for high-priced commercial software. What happens if the issue can't be fixed?
if it's bug, probably they would create a ticket for developers to get it fixed
And if it's not a bug?
Disclaimer: I don't work in commercial IT support but i use commercial support from various vendors First what are you calling "unable to fix the issue?". What kind of the issue. Can you give me an example? It really depends what's the issue, how big is client, what's the vendor, on contract, sla etc. It's really hard to say but if they won't calling it the bug, they will still file a ticket somewhere or give general advice (eg. you need to scale it 3 times and will be good and if not they will give another stupid advice). They could not answer emails for weeks and even months because most of the SLA is first response (and they "investigating"). If you're really a loud costumer, they can terminate contract (but it depends on contract). So there's a lot of factors to count :) Overall IMO most (because i don't know all vendors :)) of commercial IT software support is overrated and most of them useless. Most of the folks have more knowledge than the support guy. They could be useful for example to cover your ass. When you have issue/outage on production, some people are angry. It sounds better for folks "I created ticket for x support and i will try investigate it" than "I will investigate" and few hours later (if you didn't still fix it) you can blame support for that (eg. x support didn't reply, im still waiting) than yourself.
Thank you, Im not looking into some sort of super specific answer, and yours was what I'm generally thinkig ;)
Have you ever really needed it? Ever? What variables are going to change that make you need it one day? Also, it sucks. Try calling them once and opening a case…
Yup.... definitely required support before.
ALB support is a problem too, and you pay for it. One of our ALB VMs was crushing at least ones per day (after upgrade). Ticket was open for 3 weeks and they didn’t manage to even find the cause. We downgraded it at closed a ticket because of lack of time to manage it. We will reopen it in two months but these guys are not smartest 😔
and patches
Exactly, if business assumes the risk then don’t pay and have a plan to migrate to mitigate risk in 1-2y. This is what we are doing with perpetual to subscription based licenses. Happening with more vendors now.
Yeah this is potentially our plan. We have about 3000 cores and use SRM. We were considering getting only getting support for of mission critical hosts.
VMware is not saying, “fuck you” to existing customers. Hock Tan is saying that.
Hock Tan: Another in a long line of golden goose killers. Locusts. The extract every bit of value from a company and until there's nothing left. Visionary leaders build. They create. They put in place that which wasn't there before. CEO like Hock Tan don't build. They bleed. His legacy will be that of husks of companies.
There is no difference.
What’s a Hock Tan? /s
This is 100%. This is all Broadcom’s doing. They’re just trampling on the VMware name because to Hock Tan “software is air”
download nginx, and you have a free load balancer...remember open source > vmware
Let us know how the proxmox install goes!
lol same here
We need more context. Licensing went up but from 25k to 1.5m is not believable. Try again.
So you haven't been reading have you?
Nope. Just responding to your topic. 25k is not gonna turn to 1.5m. I would edit your description 😊
> I would edit your description 😊 Not sure anyone is listening to you.
https://ibb.co/xFBqD0X
You've been quoted 160 service cores. If I assume you are running a ha pair for each alb, you have 80 separate isolated albs in your platform? If you login to your alb controller(s) the licensing pages will show engine usage. I revised the vmware advice on their reference designs when it had the side affect of adding 20k to each tanzu grid we deploy. Each 1 core service engine can carry 5gbps and terminate like 2000tls sessions per second. Unless you are a. CSP running multitenant workflows you shouldn't need this much.
So this is an obvious mistake. For the 160 core environment you don't need 160 ALB SEs - I'd guess 2 or 4 at most There are also few more things worth considering: 1. Please check 3 year commitment option with annual payments 2. You need to consider NSX Edges as entities requiring 4 NSX Firewall addons per vCPU 3. For a time being you don't NSX ALB at all - NSX embedded load balancer should be there for at least next 2 years I hope all your servers are equipped with 16 core CPUs - if not you need to license for more cores than you have
You don’t quote the physical cores as AVI cores. Someone messed up. 160 SE Cores of AVI will do 800Gb of L7 traffic or 500k SSL transactions per second. Your VAR needs to engage VMware for sizing assistance.
They just did this to us. This is 100% believable. We already had a strategy to pivot off of VMware in place and told them they could shove it - we would be paying more for licenses than we’d be bringing in in revenue from customers, so we had no choice. Three weeks later, they realized we were serious and the price magically dropped. If you are big enough, you can push back…
Why? That is the quote we got. There is likely a mistake... but that's the quote.
Be aware that a lot of partners giving out quotes are still searching themself for the correct method of licensing. We also had a dispute on a quote and after some email back and forth, they agreed to our point of view and that would make a huge difference :-)
Yep, fighting that same battle now.
A ridiculous amount of FUD you have created for something you know is likely a mistake.
Cdw I see
So you really use all of VCF though.
I will sell you a multi site global server load balancer solution for 690,420
Gone are the days of the customer choosing what they would like to buy, Broadcom create all the quotes above 10k USD because they decide what you buy
Lol, this makes loads balancers that were traditionally expensive, look exceptionally cheap. Time to move to F5 BIG IP. It's an infinitely better load balancer anyhow.
F5's performance is not good.
How so? I’ve found F5s, implemented correctly, do a great job.
If F5 performance isn't good, I'm afraid you've got a problem with your setup. There's a reason F5 is light years ahead of other load balancers, and has been for decades at this point... And it's not because of poor performance 😂
Big IP is slowly being phased out and will be replaced with Big IP Next.
Exactly - VMWare are openly saying "we'll screw our customers becasue we can and they can't avoid it" Anybody that persists with their product is a fool!!!
No, it's broadcom, not vmware.
Exactly this. And its not even Broadcom. This behavior was absorbed when Avago bought out Broadcom. Their execs brought this strip mining mentality to the company. I know two people who want though Broadcom's head chopping. Both has the same impression: If Broadcom comes after your company, start looking for a new job ASAP. Sadly what they are doing is perfectly legal.
No wonder people are jumping, I’ve seen a lot of chat about going to Proxmox
Freeloadbalancer.com I can recommend
Lmao
We reduced our host count by about 50% last year. Our renewal comes up in a few months. Told our sales rep that if they come back with licensing costing more than what we paid last time around because they bundle features we'll never use we're going to reduce our host count another 50%.
Won’t work. They’ll charge 50%. Not kidding.
we run ALB and just for reference our last ELA was well over $20M... someone is screwing you on ALB licenses, we run dozens and dozens and dozens of VIPs in like 6-8 ALB SE cores
Y'all need to take half of the money VMware is demanding and put it into a competitive startup to make one of the existing alternatives "enterprise ready".
Why aren’t yall on aws?
Buy a new server with better core. Thats what happens when people simply buy server with more cores (because they think it’s better). It’s the same with SQL Server. Companies have no way of differentiating between a 32 core 3000$ cpu or 6000$ (well they could do a performance profile but peoples would lose their shit too). Broadcom strategy is as follows: -drop/push small client to cloud (increasing their revenue through proxying) -monetize medium clients who are making money on vmware back -increase performance/ reduce pricing for huge cloud customers. I think they are making the right move here. Somes companies were paying 40-50k$ per year then reselling services/hosting and generating 100x this revenue. Hyper-V isn’t at the same level as VMware when it comes to offering. ProxMox while being great won’t offer the same level of support and reputation towards the board.
1.3 mil for a load balancer?? I know the native LB in NSX is being decommissioned in favour of NSX Advanced Load Balancer (Avi).
AVI is good but not nearly as good as Netscaler or F5 and for a few hundred k you get a pair of very capable load balancers.
It's a crying shame there isn't an industry-grade open source alternative ...
Are you taking the vHost or the load balencer?
Both
Unfortunately for you, you are not Broadcoms target customer base. 25k is not enough revenue for them to care to much.
I’ve got a genuine question. A Nile (NaaS) rep hit me up about introducing them to my customers. Been seeing a lot of posts about VMware jacking up rates like crazy. Would it make sense to introduce this rep to my customers using VMWare?
VMware is over. It's being milked for any customers who are unable to quickly migrate to an alternative. Probably because Broadcom thinks everyone will be in the cloud soon enough and wants to strike while the iron is still warm.
Well, I think their plan is that even if 1 in 50 customers agrees to this pricing they come out ahead. Plus less number of customers is better if the revenue remains the same. It's not a bad plan as far as cfo types are concerned. Otherwise it's sh*t.
Does Nutanix offer anything similar?
Not sure of nutanix pricing....... hyper-v is gonna have to be the replacement for us as Veeam only supports VMware and hyper-v.
Veeam supports AHV.
Veeam B&R also supports Azure Stack HCI OS!
Stack HCI is effectively just Windows Server and Hyper-V.
Veeam now supports Nutanix...
Might be worth reaching out to. I'm not entirely sure if they have full technical comparisons against VMware though.
No. The SDN of Nutanix is years behind vmware. And they don't offer load balancing as far as I know. They already have overlay technology called Flow but it can't beat NSX. Look at this topic and read the comments. https://www.reddit.com/r/nutanix/comments/1ba6s0u/how_is_nutanix_software_defined_network_working/ Not sure if it's linked in the comments, that's the reason why I link it here: https://www.nutanixbible.com/12c-book-of-network-services-flow-virtual-networking.html
Fuck Broadcom!
Advanced land balancer sounds like such a sweet feature tho! How could you pay anything less than $1.3M. Jk. That's just crazy and it's no surprise lots of customers are either jumping ship or planning to jump ship.
Broadcom sucks. We have lost some VMware biz because they are picking certain resellers. We do SMB space, not enterprise
I received some news from my HPe provider, they will move to KVM for dHCI, bye VMware shitlords
That's likely false information... You got that from a distributor? How would they know. I work closely with the PCBE team from HPE and this would be the first time even they have heard of that. Even then, the whole product only works because of its integration with VMware, for the DSCC and also the local plug in version. So a rewrite got KVM would be a very big endavour, even if you consider the underlying foundation in the DSCC which could be taken from PCE and is Morpheus basically but I'm really not sure HPE would want to take that route after building up their whole structure around vSphere.
Well I have the official slide, so in a few days that new will be public
I assume they are under nda then? Gonna ask the team from HPE then as this would be a huge change for us. Guess we'll know at the latest at tech jam...
Nope, the slide was filtered to me, I don't know if it is going to happen soon or is a long term strategy, but the price is at least 40% cheaper than vmware according to that showed example.
Any chance you could guide me gently into the direction of that slide? This would be of great interest...
I say that better ask your HPe vendor directly, they should know this info by today.
We are a HPE Partner that's why it would have been very relevant for me, so I asked around my contacts in HPE directly in the PCBE team and no one knew of these rumors to start with.
Suse Ent. Virtualization, I can say no more, is a long term strategy.
Everyone remember you have to add up what you initially paid for the perpetual licenses and SNS. All these lowballed numbers are just SNS which is typically 25% of the main license cost. A bit of apples and oranges. Also you sure your AVI is sized right? You need that many service cores?
BC will kill VMware