Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

nginx.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 408 posts

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#251

Post by geofft »

james_s_tayler wrote: post #224
nordsieck wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Also, lawyers are not like Pokemon. You cannot beat the opposing team's lawyers by having more stronger lawyers. You can certainly lose by having bad lawyers, but you can only be guaranteed to win by being in the right. > You can't actually be guaranteed to win by being in the right. You can be in the right and lose. What he's obviously saying is that there is a seriously decreasing marginal benefit to more expens…

Well his intention is clear. But stating you are guaranteed to win if you are in the right strikes me as naive at best and woefully neglectful of reality at worst. It's probably best stated like "lawyers are not _always_ like Pokemon". Sometimes they very definitely are.

Yeah, my phrasing was sloppy: you're not guaranteed to win whenever you're in the right. But being in the right is a precondition of being guaranteed to win (along with having competent lawyers, a competent judge, etc.).

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#252

Post by xnyan »

bouncycastle wrote: post #85

First time I heard of this company. Their website is in the highest order of marketing speak, but actually offering nothing much. Note to self: security services are a nice way to milk governments & corporations. In any case, I'm glad that Nginx is still available for free and the project will continue to have funding in the future from what looks like a cashed-up company. Besides, if it doesn't work out, it can alwa…

F5 is big in its category (software http "router") in a lot of important industries including finance and healthcare. It's the SSL terminator of choice overall for enterprise environments and is a critical part countless L3 toolchains and workflows.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#254

Post by Whitestrake »

etaioinshrdlu wrote: post #247
Whitestrake wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sorry to hear about the damage done to your business. I appreciate that you took the time to list out those grievances. I'd like to respond on a few points, for the sake of clarity (if you're interested, but also for other readers here). That header thing was indeed a bit of a fiasco; a misguided attempt to honour the few that stepped up to support Caddy monetarily. Once the depth of the issue was made clear to…

Yo thanks for taking the time to write this. Obviously hard to complain too much about a free product - I'm sharing my personal experience for others. So the thing I like about AWS is that they can give you a cert before pointing the DNS A record at your site. Really fool-proof and excellent. Much better than the let's encrypt flow by design. In fact on some of my sites I now run Caddy on AWS behind a load balancer w…

No worries, hope it makes the facts nice and transparent for people. If anyone reading this has questions or concerns about Caddy, I'd invite further discussion over on their forums.

I believe AWS can do this because they have proof that you own the domain (effectively DNS validation) before handing out certs. Caddy can do similar with DNS validation - fetching your cert without needing to be publicly accessible. It needs you to hook into the API of one of the supported DNS providers though, because validation is still done on a per-request basis (but it has been able to do wildcards for a while). I understand that AWS is more validate once, sign certificates many times, which is quite convenient - and it all hooks into their systems fairly automatically.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#255

Post by shereadsthenews »

davidopp__ wrote: post #250
shereadsthenews wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But K8s is not a development of Google software. It is developed specifically for the public, it throws out all of the interesting parts of Borg, and Google themselves don't use it, or barely do. As for that other stuff it seems to have worked out fine for Google: they describe obsolete technologies and the outside world develops hideous analogs of those and uses them for decades. Hadoop for example is just an unbeli…

> it throws out all of the interesting parts of Borg This is not true. It throws out the Google-specific parts of Borg (like integration with Google's service discovery, load balancing, and monitoring systems) and improves a number of things compared to Borg. For a good reference on the evolution of Borg into Kubernetes, I recommend the recent Kubernetes Podcast interview with Brian Grant: https://kubernetespodcast.c…

Unfortunately we can't discuss the parts of Google's platform that aren't in Kubernetes on this forum. If we could, I think I could defend my statement reasonably well. But perhaps you just don't think that the pieces I would mention qualify as interesting.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#256

Post by elagost »

kayfox wrote: post #236
elagost wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use F5's at work. The F5's do their job very very well, but are very very touchy. I've always considered nginx to be solid, stable, and low-maintenance. I think the opposite about F5 and am worried about this transition. 1) You can't export and re-import a config. Just doesn't work. 2) For the Virtual Appliance (not a recommended scenario by F5, to be fair) it's temperamental about its host and doesn't like to be m…

I use F5s at work, heres some responses: 1) You can, if you are careful about what your doing. UCS archives are only intended to be restored on the same machines, restoring them on a different machine requires considering the master key for secret encryption and omitting the license from the UCS. If your restoring it on another model F5, you might be going about things in a sub-optimal way. 2) This typically relates…

Thanks for your responses. A good foil to my complaints. My experience is very selective.

I agree on 5, too - I'd rather have the bug published and at least know that it's been seen and is being worked on, but still, it's a little disheartening to look at an update you're about to install and see its list of breaks is longer than its list of fixes.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#258

Post by [deleted] »

dsl wrote: post #190
darksoul wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the public statements, F5 is committing to maintain the current level of resources NGINX has allocated to their open source programs, to keep the same dev team involved, to keep licensing as it currently is, not change any of the repositories on Mercurial and GitHub and to keep the NGINX brand. Which only means that NGINX will get even better over time.

NGINX was already paywalling bug fixes once they launched Pro. proxy_pass for example will only resolve a hostname at the time the configuration is parsed, unless you use a convoluted variable hack. This was a serious issue requiring you to restart your fleet if a backend server changed IPs. The bug fix for this was implemented only in Pro and sold as "DNS for Service Discovery."

[deleted]

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#259

Post by Terretta »

mitchellh wrote: post #193
user5994461 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They barely have any revenue and they're struggling. It's probably one of the next companies to be acquired in the coming years.

I'm one of the founders of HashiCorp. We don't publicly talk about exact numbers, but we broke through 9-figures last year, and a very low % of that is support (its mostly enterprise software). That also isn't using any accounting tricks (such as a ton of multi-year deals). We're doing very well. We're in no talks to be acquired, either. I can't prove any of this, you'd have to take my word for it! I guess if we ever…

Fantastic to hear you’re still crushing it.

Re: Nginx to Be Acquired by F5 Networks

#260

Post by swasheck »

vetrom wrote: post #201
tyingq wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine haproxy might get more popular if F5 does anything to hobble the open source part of nginx.

haproxy is amazingly functional and has done a fine job of evolving over the years. At a particular $DEFUNCTCLOUDVENDOR we implemented a haproxy based ELB-ish solution with home grown control logic to replace a F5 installation whos configuration size grew unwieldy (the F5 config parser was falling over in their LBs) while we were nowhere near the F5's touted connection/throughput numbers. F5 wasn't really willing to…

18 months ago I was in a shop that used F5 and it was a nightmare. Some of the best network admins I've ever worked with and they couldn't nail down why the load balancer did the things it did, when it did them. It was bad enough that the config had more exceptions than rules just so that we could try to eliminate anomalies.

I hope NGINX doesn't suffer too much under this new ownership.

Post reply on HN