4 ms·
> imagine Apache or Nginx would do that. Nginx will likely do something similar, very soon. It's not that long ago when F5 bought them, with clear plans to off
by bostik 6y ago
> imagine Apache or Nginx would do that.
Nginx will likely do something similar, very soon. It's not that long ago when F5 bought them, with clear plans to offer paid-only features while the core itself remains open.
Give it another 5 years and I expect nginx to propagate some of those special features to the open-source version, but with the restriction that you can't offer them as a service vendor without a specific license.
- takeda 6y agoI never understood the appeal of Nginx. I mean, I understand the web server, it's much easier than setting up apache, and before apache introduced event based mpm it was also much faster. What I mean is the load balancing functionality of F5. It's in the same league as proxy support in apache[1]. Hardly comparable to for example what HAProxy provides, yet for some reason F5 (which is a leader in hardware load balancing, sadly though with public cloud that market is shrinking) found it interesting. Is it because of the name recognition, and they plan on turning Nginx into a proper load balancer? Because in terms of functionality Nginx is not even close to their LTM (even HAProxy is missing a lot of its features). [1] I'm talking about the non paid version, there are some health checks in paid although still the support is rather weak.
- nix23 6y ago>Nginx will likely do something similar, very soon. Ahh the oracle of Delphi...if they do that, everyone will change to caddy or apache and that's exactly why they don't do it. Amazon/Google etc can give a shit about nginx, if they change the licenses they will just hurt themself.