OpenStack Foundation Transforms Into the Open Infrastructure Foundation

An anonymous reader quotes a report from ZDNet: The writing was on the wall two years ago. The OpenStack Foundation was going to cover more than just the OpenStack Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) cloud. Today, that metamorphosis is complete. The Foundation now covers a wide variety of open-source cloud and container technologies as the Open Infrastructure Foundation. Why so long? COO Mark Collier said, "They wanted to be sure they did this right." One reason for this was to make sure they could differentiate their group from The Linux Foundation's Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), which covers much of the same ground.

The Open Infrastructure Foundation executive director Jonathan Bryce said that, "OpenStack is still one of the top three most active open source projects in the world. It's just the landscape of infrastructure and there are many new exciting trends with open becoming more and more ubiquitous." To make use of all these different ways the cloud has evolved requires new software programs and that's where the Open Infrastructure Foundation comes in. The new Foundation's mission is to establish new open-source communities to help bring into production new emerging use cases. This includes AI/ML; CI/CD; container infrastructure; edge computing; 5G; and public, private and hybrid clouds.

Re:

[See Attached]

Missed the first Part about Jail in the SDNY. (oh and year is 2021)

Give up with this

[1s44c]

It's long past time to give up with openstack. The only company I know still using it is losing staff and burning money because of it. Its pure trash compared to Google cloud or AWS.

Re:

[theJavaMan]

I wonder if having been written in Python was OpenStack's biggest mistake.

Re:

[Junta]

Nah, it's more the complete lack of coherent vision combined with being ruined by its time as a buzzword by accepting pretty much any and all comers.

Exceeding bureaucratic and a lot of companies playing the game of trying to have OpenStack somehow particularly be aligned to *their* brand/product and ultimately the project at large would shrug and say 'sure', whether it made sense or not.

Openstack became everything and nothing in particular at the same time. Now the people are trying to pivot from OpenStack

Re:

[postbigbang]

It gives them an opportunity to front for the OpenStack principles + other stuff To Be Named... and is host-agnostic.

The Host Agnostic part is pretty important; lots of problems with the proprietary natures of AWS, Google, Azure, Oracle, and last but not least, IBM.... and the also rans.

There's a boatload of money behind this new foundation to burn, and an army of serious coders-- already moving and coding and making things. Money+coder energy can be a force to reckon with. And no, I have no relationship wi

Re:

[Junta]

I agree with the principle, but the problem is the implementation has been exceedingly lacking. Stronger leadership and perhaps a more targeted implementation and/or stronger vision would be needed.

As it stands, it is a mess. I hope for the mantle to be taken up by a more capable team, and without the distraction of various vendors derailing the implementation to further proprietary products under the guise of 'open'.

Re:

[postbigbang]

In reality, genuinely "open", a small number of dedicate coders have created enormous orchestras using the OpenStack principles of totally abstracted layering. K8 is kute, but extreme armies need vendor neutrality and interoperability to work.

It's my estimation that this is where their motives lay, and they're funded, and they have people that understand application-through-network core/storage abstractions. This isn't junior's first docker-run sort of group.

Vendors will ALWAYS try to insert themselves into

Re:

[Junta]

OpenStack abstractions can go into the weeds. When I hear that a client is having issues with OpenStack generally I expect an overly complicated networking strategy ostensibly in the name of abstraction, but the abstraction is generally worse than just working with what is trying to be abstracted away. Playing odd games with mac addresses being substituted multiple times such that some network adapter erroneously drops rx packets as it has no idea that the mac is something it is actually supposed to be rece

Re:

[postbigbang]

There is truth to this; it is a like a flock of birds sometimes.

That said, when they're well-implemented their both bulletproof and highly sustainable. As an alternative to cloud-specific buses and infrastructure, it provides a lot of the tools to do sophisticated jobs. Keeping them all in sync and corralling the herd isn't so easy.

And yeah, it suffers from vendor marketing flatulence, but there are some killer constructs that take a pile of tools to do certain kinds of jobs using other methods.

Re:

[1s44c]

I doubt that has much to do with it. It's more that it's a big pile of parts that just don't work well together.

Re:

[Deaddy]

Given that places like CERN run OpenStack very sucessfully and also my place has a nice OpenStack infra which now seems to be preferred by many to pre-existing VMware and KVM stuff, I would think that the companies you are referring to are doing something wrong.

Buying infra from cloud providers is very expensive for large workloads and also you give up souvereignity over your data, disqualifying it in many instances.

The operational costs of OpenStack are also quite low, especially with the Kubernetes deploy

Re:

[1s44c]

That's brilliant. It exactly sums up the experience of using openstack.

Re:

[sinkskinkshrieks]

If we look at who contributed most to OS post-NASA, it was mostly a bunch consultant companies who thrive on deployment, integration, and support labor charges, not making things easy or reliable. They wanted it to be purposefully as incomplete, fragmented, buggy, and unpolished as possible so they can swoop in to the rescue with their proprietary fixes and custom versions that they don't contribute back. Furthermore, design-by-committee software ends-up like OpenSSL, TLS, or anything by CCITT or ISO. The b