Re: [load balancing] Two Load Balancing Markets

From: Simon Hamilton-Wilkes <sjhwilkes [izzat] gmail.com>
Date: Mon May 21 2007 - 14:54:32 EDT

I think 4 hour support is less relevant on products that are usually
installed in redundant pairs with stateful failover. I'm only happy to pay
the premium for it on items (6500 chassis etc) that can't be easily
replicated (or are too big to easily keep spares for).

Simon

-----Original Message-----
From: lb-l-bounces@vegan.net [mailto:lb-l-bounces@vegan.net] On Behalf Of
Seth Kusiak
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 11:20 AM
To: Load Balancing Mailing List
Subject: Re: [load balancing] Two Load Balancing Markets

Sometimes I wonder if F5 should be considered a premium enterprise vendor.
We have F5's and they're great - they technically do what we need and more.
My issue with them being considered a premium enterprise vendor is that they
don't offer 4 hour hardware replacements. For the premium enterprise market,
this is unacceptable. Heck, even my T3 DSU hardware vendor has 4 hour
hardware replacement and they're nowhere near as big as F5.

It would be nice if anyone from F5 can comment if they plan to offer 4 hour
replacements anytime soon.

Seth

-----Original Message-----
From: lb-l-bounces@vegan.net [mailto:lb-l-bounces@vegan.net] On Behalf Of
Tony Bourke
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:58 PM
To: Load Balancing Mailing List
Subject: [load balancing] Two Load Balancing Markets

As a discussion topic:

Load Balancing (or Application Delivery
Appliances/Doodads/Whositwhatsits) has evolved since the dot-com boom, but
instead of evolving into one market, it's split into two, very separate and
distinct markets. While even today they've been treated as pretty much one
market, it's time to treat them separately, as they increasingly have little
to do with each other.

There's the premium enterprise market, with vendors such as Citrix and F5.

In the budget SMB market, you have vendors like Barracuda, KEMP, and
CoyotePoint.

Enterprise/premium clients need the advanced features that the premium
products provide as well as the support that a 50+ person support and SE

staff can provide. SMB/budget clients need the affordability with the
basic functionality of load balancing, plus a few extras (SSL acceleration,
cookie persistence, etc.). The target market for one is unlikely to
purchase from the other. A startup isn't likely to drop $100K on a load
balancer, and a bank isn't likely to try and save some money by going with a
budget box when the difference would represent
even less than a rounding error on their IT budget. There may be some
crossover in some edge cases, but from what I've seen they are increasingly
developing on separate evolutionary tracts.

Agree? Disagree?

Tony

_______________________________________________
lb-l mailing list
lb-l@vegan.net
http://vegan.net/mailman/listinfo/lb-l
Searchable Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive http://lbdigest.com Load
Balancing Digest

_______________________________________________
lb-l mailing list
lb-l@vegan.net
http://vegan.net/mailman/listinfo/lb-l
Searchable Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive http://lbdigest.com Load
Balancing Digest

_______________________________________________
lb-l mailing list
lb-l@vegan.net
http://vegan.net/mailman/listinfo/lb-l
Searchable Archive: http://vegan.net/lb/archive
http://lbdigest.com Load Balancing Digest
Received on Mon May 21 15:08:11 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 21 2007 - 15:08:12 EDT