Complete Turn Key Linux Server

[Matt Darnell]

Charles,

If you are I would love to have some coffee and discuss the idea.
If anyone else would be interested in joining the team let me know!
Everything I read leads me to think this is possible.

Are there meetings, like the electronic pizza, or is this a newsgroup only
group?

Aloha,
Matt


----- Original Message -----
From: <cpaul at telemetrybox.org>
To: "Linux & Unix Advocates & Users" <luau at list.luau.hi.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 12:24 PM
Subject: [luau] Re: Complete Turn Key Linux Server


> > Before I answer you question let me define the problem I am trying to
solve;
> > There are lots of small businesses in Hawaii (and elsewhere) that need
all
> > of the services I mentioned in the earlier email.  They are all
available
> > but from 5 different vendors at costs that are prohibitive.
> >
> > To answer you question, we would sell hardware, and the services to
> > integrate and maintain the applications, not the apps themselves. - Not
sure
> > if that is a slippery slope in the GPL world.
>
> That should be feasible - a system interface to GPL software can be
proprietary, as long as you don't use GPL components in that interface.
Using GPLed components, however, would exponentially decrease the
development time.
>
> > > As for the web-based system administration...  I think that the
embedded
> > industry will be moving away from that  towards distributed/spreadable,
> > SSL-enabled applications written in high-level languages.  HTTP is the
wrong
> > solution to stateful applications like secure administration.
> >
> > What would you suggest.  I have been reading latley that pop3, smtp,
http
> > etc. will soon be going the way of archie, veronica, gopher etc.
>
> Well, for now HTTP is the standard for distributed applications (The
Webmin software comes to mind).  There are alternatives however:
>
> Raw Unix RPC -- the worst option :)
>
> XML-RPC -- which is a bit heavy (all information is passed as XML data)
and relies on a web server.
>
> SOAP -- Very similar to XML-RPC, co-developed by Microsoft - requires a
webserver.
>
> Twisted Manhole -- A Python based "spreadable" application framework which
is bleeding-edge and therefore not widely used (yet).
>
> .NET -- Microsoft's framework which is cutting-edge but (currently) very
proprietary.
>
> I have experience with Twisted Manhole and XML-RPC.  XML-RPC is a fine
framework for getting an application up and running QUICK, but it has
serious pitfalls when it comes to preserving user sessions and security.
>
> It should be noted, that these technologies require customized software to
be run on the client-side; an advantage that raw HTTP still has.
>
>
> > I would want to sell the after install support with the model above.
The
> > computer would probably be a clone of quality componenets sold at near
cost.
>
> Why not sell the preconfigured clone (a rackmount 1U or whatever) at a
significant markup?  I would just spraypaint the case, disable BIOS access,
hack a custom framebuffer startup screen, and mount some LEDs to scare the
clueless into thinking that the machine has "Voodoo" inside. (This has the
psychological bonus of discouraging IT-cowboys from tinkering with the
machine)
>
> In comparison a (decent) Cisco PIX will cost you $4,500.  Along with
firewall functionality, your machine will act as a mail server, web server,
file server, and a domain controller. All of that will increase the value to
the point where you could charge $6,500 and still come out with the
satisfying feeling of "Giving more than you have recieved."
>
> There are several experienced systems integrators on this list (aside from
me) who could help you out with this venture.  Hoala Greevy, who makes his
living selling a similar solution, comes first to mind.
>
>
> Take care,
> Charles Paul
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to luau as: mdarnell at servpac.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst('Email.Unsub')
>