It's always possible for you to install cPanel -- shudder -- on a node yourself, though acquiring the license is an exercise left to the reader.

_________________
Matt Nordhoff (aka Peng on IRC)

ISPConfig 3 isn't bad. Not as robust as cPanel but it gets the job done.

1) Manage multiple linode's under the one login.

2) Datacentre in Australia,
A) or some where within Asia. pipenetworks are the leading Datacentre provider in AU.

3) opt-in Managed Service.
A) You pay extra to have a managed service.

All of these have already been mentioned, but just to add another vote to each item:

1) I CAN HAZ MOAR STORAGE!!??

2) Get HE to fix Fremont, or move/expand to another West Coast datacenter.

3) Anything in the Dashboard that looks like a list should be sortable. The default should be either alphabetical or timestamp-descending, depending on the type of data.

1. Datacenter in Germany.

2. FreeBSD.

3. NAS or something similar. Load up a rack of platters and give us a mount point!

Only 2 suggestions

1) Cynical hat on here, but customers have been banging-on about more storage availability for years and nothing's come of it....I seem to remember suggesting vps.net-style storage nodes ages ago in the forums and AFAIK it didn't even get a staff acknowledgement.

2) FreeBSD

In order of importance:

1. Don't sell out.
2. Don't change. I don't want you to become Amazon (read: people paying $0.05 for ten minutes of server time, where's the money in that for you?) or anyone else. I love Linode for what it is, the fact that you've got more than enough customers to pay the bills shows this. That's not to say you can sit smugly and never improve (and that you've posted this thread shows you know this. Just keep on being Linode.
3. A storage solution, as so many others have indicated. I know competing against Amazon isn't easy, but the fact that it would be local and maybe even a mountable FS would mean that I'd pay more than I pay Amazon. Sure, it should run a web server on it (80 and 443) so I could serve directly from it (i.e., storage.example.com for example.com) but make it so it's mountable internally so I can drop files on it without having to do increasingly complex things with my CMS (read: would thus work out of the box with any website thanks to a simple symlink).

Precisely what Brian said ^there^. #3 welcome, but less important to me.

_________________
rsk, providing useless advice on the Internet since 2005.

@Brian +1

1. IP6 enabled by default, a "portable" /96 assigned by default (so if you move datacenter you don't need to renumber).

2. Cleanup the IRC log directory; whenever there's an issue I always check the current log before joining the channel and it's hard to find amongst the historical files. (basically, auto-archive logs older than a week)

3. Petition DCs to remove port filters, or move out of those DCs if they won't. We should determine what we want filtered, not upstream providers. (this doesn't impact me, but it's a bad thing...)

_________________
Rgds
Stephen
(Linux user since kernel version 0.11)

It already is (when creating in or migrating into a v6-enabled facility). I also cleaned up the irc log dir.

-Chris

Going to hone my previous storage suggestion a bit, based on others' ideas and more thinking...

Using Amazon Web Services as a reference point, I think something between S3 and EBS would be ideal.

S3's problem is that it lacks the filesystem semantics we all know and love, making things like s3fs a kludge of the first order. On the other hand, concurrent access is trivial: each operation stands alone, so it doesn't matter if you have a hundred instances reading/writing to the same bucket.

EBS's problem is that it lacks concurrent access. By emulating a block device, this means you can't use "normal" Linux filesystems if you want multiple servers mounting it read/write simultaneously. Also, despite "elastic" being in the name, resizing is not possible without snapshot/restore. Both of these problems can be worked around using LVM and fancy filesystems, but that's not easy, and that's not the Linode Way. I'm off of IRC for a bit (I'll be back on as soon as I'm caught up with coursework ha ha hahaha why am I in the forums oh god I'm going to fail) but I break out in a cold sweat just thinking of someone --forcing a read-write mount of an ext4 filesystem from two Linodes.....

So, something in the middle. Perhaps NFS to a massive NAS, or something involving GlusterFS, or both. Or maybe the rsync.net (Not Affiliated With rsync Industries) model would work.

It would necessarily be slower than local storage, but that's OK, just as long as it's cheaper and won't impact core service reliability.

Anonymous HTTP access (e.g. S3-style static hosting, perhaps integrated with NodeBalancer?) would still be nice, for those folks still using Apache+mod_php, but... eh, screw 'em.

_________________

/* TODO: need to add signature to posts */

1. BSD

2. Data Center in Netherlands

3. Like some other poster said please dont sell linode

_________________
www.ruchirablog.com

1. Android App

2. Add new articles to Linode Library and Improve existing articles

3. Add more Linux distros and flavors of UNIX (*BSDs, etc).

Android app is already there! Search Market with "Linode"

_________________
www.ruchirablog.com