Hi all,
In an attempt to get all questions, concerns, discussions and (hopefully) solutions in one place, let me give this a head start:
3 ZOS – V4 MOS
-
We currently have around 70 deployments installed on both our nodes as well as on customer nodes. We have access to it through SLA and need to be able to manage them using our used Terraform scripts and dashboard. We NEED this also in MOS. From day 1.
-
In the Teraform constructions wireguard is used to connect nodes like Nextcloud to Borgbackup, mycelium is no option. We need to make 100% sure this continues to work after moving.
-
Our earning model is we buy a lot of tokens, and deploy for customers that pay in FIAT. This construction needs to stay available. Threefold asked for the communoity to beef up usage, we did, now we need to continue this uninterrupted.
-
We determine VM specs based on requirements for instance Nextcloud. 2 vcpu, 2 GB RAM (default) and 100, 200, 400, 1 TB storage or upon customer specs. We need to continue to have this flexibility regardless of the ‘slice’ system.
-
We are currently paying interns to write software/LLM for us to be able to deploy on multiple nodes, multiple gateways and backup nodes. Like a clusert with 6 or 7 nodes for instance. Whatever V4 brings, this effort should not be pointless, we invested too much. We continue to need the flexibility on reserving ‘part of’ node capacity based on customer speficications using tokens, not fiat!
V4 INCA – V4 MOS
In 2024/2025 we spend weeks determining specs for INCA nodes. We sold a dozen nodes to customer who invested in the ‘future’. They were promised INCA for a minimum of 18 months, in which they could not deloy on their nodes but receive 100% rewards. They had no visibility on uptime and how many tokens they were entitled to but were told ‘soon’ this would appear somewhere. How are we handling the transition and compensation for these users. And this answer need to come quick!!!
Also…realise that until all the above answers are answered, clarified, agreed and (if needed) solved, it is unfair to use the end of March as a deadline for V4 registration, since there are way too many uncertainties.
Slices:
Why has the slices model been chosen? What is the advantage to the end user/buyer?
Here are some current default node specs:
NUC: 14 vcpu, 64 GB DDR5 RAM and 4 TB SSD storage.
Slices woul become: 8 GB RAM, 1,75 vcpu, 500 SSD.
Rackserver: 88 vcpu, 768 GB RAM, 8 TB storage(and growing)
Slicess would be: 8 GB RAM: 0,92 vcpu, 83 GB SSD.
So, if I need a VM with 4vpcu I’m getting a whopping 32 Gb RAM? And 333 GD storage?
- How does the above make sense?
- How can customers now choose 100, 200, 500 etc storage? How can anyone ‘sell’ 83 GB storage?
- Rackservers are expanded storage based on growth and demand, so what happens to the (current and future) slices of we add another 12 TB to us running 8 TB node?
Nodes:
The minimim specs for nodes are now:
• CPU 6cores
• RAM 16GB
• Storage 1TB SSD
• Network 10Mbps
- Why did we switch from vcpu to cpu?
- Let me assume it means 6 vcpu/threads;
Then that node would have 2 slices:
3 vcpu, 8 GB RAM and 500 GB SSD?
Unless I misunderstand the slices model; to make efficient use of all the different specs and capacity of current (and future…cause their be less cores but more efficient) nodes, should we consider slicing specs up seperately?
12 vcpu means 12 slices of 1 vcpu
64 GD RAM means 64 slices of 1 GB
4 TB storage means 40 slices of 100 GB?
Since the efficiency and speed of cores, the type of RAM (DDR4 DDR5), type of storage? SSD (pci4.0 or 5.0) HDD etc. change over time and all have different pricing, it would also be priced more realisticly.
‘If’ slices are really needed.
Before we invest heavily in brands new rack nodes, we need a rock solid agremeent and understanding of the consequences and ROI.
Sales
We all want the grid to grow and for all efforts to make some return. Whether you’re a farmer or service provider. Usage has always been the keyword here, so, we have worked hard and have dozens of Terrabytes in use on the grid. And MUCH more to come.
What Threefold lacks is understanding of the end users. They seems to believe that building a ‘gadget’ that they would really want themselves, that suddenly eveyone would want that too. That’s not reality. Maybe a handful of nerds do. It takes time, effort, marketing (early in the process, not afterwards)
(Large) companies are the places where most profit can be made. If these can embrace their data running on our grid, it would fly.
Listen to what the market wants!
Now, you can hardly ever run into a medium to large firm and convince them to leave their current service provider alone and switch to the grid. It simply doesn’t happen. Where you need to focus on are the current system integrators of those end users, that have spend years building relationships bring their customer to sharepoint and office365. If THOSE parties wake up and are looking to build pilots with you in order to conviince their customers to switch, that’s where it starts to fly. So, concentrate on these groups that have a lot of buinesses in their IT control or lots of followers like we do. Make sure it is financially interesting for them to take their customers away from 365 to sovereign alternatives.
Nextcloud has taken thast smart path. They now have millions of users world wide and started in 2016. They have dozens of ‘service prividers’ that sell their enterprise seats. Purchase at 19 euro sell at 69.
It is those service providers that now install nextcloud at their clients.
Threefold needs to think about that. USE the parties that have this influence and give them the financial interest to take it furhter. Creating foss for end users will have no attraction for them.
Now, we have more ideas, but will not give them away without being able to make a return.
