Cumulus Releases GNU/Linux For Datacenter Routers

alphadogg writes "Start-up Cumulus Networks this week has emerged with a Linux network operating system designed for programmable data centers like the ones Google and Facebook are building. The company's Cumulus Linux OS operating system includes IPv4 and IPv6 routing, plus data center and network orchestration hooks. Much like OpenFlow for independent, software-defined control of network forwarding, Cumulus Linux is intended to run on commodity network hardware and bring Open Source extensibility to high capacity data centers. The head of the company used to work for Cisco and Google." The distribution is based on Debian and ported to several router platforms. They claim to release most of their code Open Source, but there are at least a few proprietary bits for interfacing to the routing hardware itself.

Comments

Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Professional Develop]

If you don't want to use Linux in your datacenter setup (and not many of us do), it's better to get a Microsoft router. This is the same technology they use in newest airplanes and space shuttles - ie., top notch tech.

If you don't care about running a datacenter, there is also Windows Azure cloud hosting platform. It directly integrates with your existing MS stack (Visual Studio, IIS server software) and is beauty to work with. I can only recommended Azure so much, but trust me, it's your dreams come true.

- Mark Johnsson

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Shill much?

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve, is that you?

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you sure that wasn't meant to be a sarcastic joke?

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Neckbeard Pete, is that you?

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Never mind, you were right. 2 Posts in history and both are pro-MS advertisements.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know. Relatively new UID with 2 posts - both very Microsoft positive... I'm going with shill.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Professional Develop]

Doesn't change the fact that Professional Develop is right.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

And now you're referring to yourself in the third person? Nice......

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

> same technology they use in space shuttles

You mean the ones in the museum?
I suppose it is plausible that windows software could be behind the the museum box with a button that say 'touch here to play a informative video'?

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[evilviper]

by Professional Develop (2957023):
Doesn't change the fact that Professional Develop is right.

LOL!

You forgot to click the "Post Anonymously" check-box. The internet is hard...

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

I can only recommended Azure so much, but trust me, it's your dreams come true. So Windows Azure can put me on a tropical beach with a harem of super models and an endless supply of beer and tacos?

I'm in!

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Shhh! Don't tell him about that... :)

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Cenan]

This is the same technology they use in newest airplanes and space shuttles - ie., top notch tech.

What shuttles? And what tech is that, that so easily transcends working parameters to be "top notch" in both space, airplanes and datacenters? Oh, a plastic box labelled "Microsoft", for sale for $8 and filled with junk, soldered to an unrecognisable mess by some overworked 8 year old chineese boy?

If you don't care about running a datacenter, there is also Windows Azure cloud hosting platform.

Yes, because "cloud" magically whisks the network stack away to fariy land, where there are no outages outside of your control, and the five-nines you got promised isn't just 9.9999%.

It directly integrates with your existing MS stack (Visual Studio, IIS server software) and is beauty to work with.

There is nothing beautiful about IIS, and since you're on the subject of astroturfing, why isn't Windows 8 mentioned in the "stack"? At least that would have been somewhat on topic, if not even more laughable.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

After that much beer and that many tacos, I'm pretty sure the supermodels would be driven away by the overpowering flatulence, leaving you with just beer, tacos, and beach.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Not TacoHell tacos. Real tacos. Besides, even if they bolted, would "beer, tacos and beach" really be so bad?

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[ganjadude]

this is one of the worst microshills i think i have ever read

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[ganjadude]

oh great, so when i go to see the shuttle on the intrepid you mean when i push the button for the video to pop up im just going to get a BSOD??!?!!

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[ganjadude]

beer beach and tacos is always a good idea

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[BitZtream]

If your going to make an OSS router, you start with FreeBSD, which has been the fastest routing stack on the planet and has been for over 10 years.

Starting with Linux tells you they didn't engineer the project, they buzz word managed it.

At no point does using Microsoft * make sense for infrastructure

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Kimomaru]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I had NO idea Microsoft makes any network hardware, AND I WORK IN THE INDUSTRY!!!!! OMG MY SIDES HURT!!!!!!

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't care about running a datacenter, there is also Windows Azure cloud hosting platform. It directly integrates with your existing MS stack (Visual Studio, IIS server software) and is beauty to work with. I can only recommended Azure so much, but trust me, it's your dreams come true.

Your dreams come true...

Sorry, but I prefer to use a vendor who got a clue.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

This whole line of comments made me actually lol.

Thank you, everyone, for brightening my day. :)

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

it's better to get a Microsoft router. This is the same technology they use in newest airplanes and space shuttles - ie., top notch tech.

Top notch tech such as:

default 128-bit wireless security (WEP)

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[steelfood]

Makes me wonder if the whole thread was shills arguing with shills, or the one shill arguing with himself to generate discussion.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Johnsson? You sound like a fag nigger from Redmond.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

oh great, so when i go to see the shuttle on the intrepid you mean when i push the button for the video to pop up im just going to get a BSOD??!?!!

Actually I've read not too long ago right here in Slashdot that NASA recently made the decision to only allow linux on board after a virus took out a tablet\laptop the astronauts used for video conferencing, emailing friends and family, and so on.
Mind you I didn't bother reading the article and my memory isn't what it used to...

Captcha: trusty

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[iggymanz]

Hahaha, I'm going to trust the company that makes the biggest malware propogation systems on the planet, Microsoft, to build security appliances and secure platforms? bwhahahahaha! why don't we hire the russian mafia to protect the smithsonian?

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

"FreeBSD, which has been the fastest routing stack"

Hahahahah, riiiight.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Please provide anecdotal evidence. There's a reason Juniper is based on FreeBSD

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

<shill> This is the same technology they use in newest airplanes and space shuttles - ie., top notch tech.</shill>

It's time to update your analogies; the US space shuttles and the Soviet Buran program are both defunct now. It's like saying "space age" and thinking it means something more than "1950s or later".

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[cas2000]

yeah, it's so they don't have to release the source to their changes.

that's great for juniper, but completely irrelevant when the topic is GPL router software.

BTW, back in the early and mid 90s, freebsd had a better networking stack. that was a long time ago, back in the days of linux versions 0.99.x and 1.x. Linux caught up and passed them. just as importantly, linux has support for many more networking devices and chipsets than freebsd.

Re:Microsoft Broadband Networking Wireless Router

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, I had the displeasure of configuring some of this shi^H^Htuff up for someone once.

Guy: "the Microsoft rep told me they were really good, he wouldn't lie would he?"

Turns out it was rebadged Buffalo stuff, but with great features like the drivers for the Wifi card being nearly 100MB and requiring the installation of DirectX 9.0c or something and the configuration web page on the router only working in IE. Oh, and it would only run in NAT mode, but couldn't authenticate the PPPoE connection properly, so I ended up with a router doing that, and then the Microsoft one doing the wireless network, which of course meant that the wireless clients were a NAT away from wired clients, causing other problems.

Within a month, Microsoft dropped the product range with some non-sensical "we've done what we set out to do by improving the security of home networks".

I'd Rate you funny if I had the mod Points!

[rahvin112]

Many peoples sarcasm detectors are broken!

Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[erroneus]

What amazes me is the current level of brand name dominance in technology. (I know, I'm repeating myself so I'll abbreviate) It's all so consumerist. We don't care what it actually does or doesn't do... or even how well it does it. We just care about the brand name.

"Do you know about networking?" "I'm Cisco Certified!!" "That wasn't the question..."

How many Cisco certified people do you know that don't know anything about networking?? I know a lot. It's the brand name that makes them important and the brand name that makes these devices valuable.

It tickles me to hear people say "Linux" and "toy" in the same sentence knowing that Cisco uses Linux in almost everything these days. That's like saying "I own a Lexus, you wouldn't catch me dead in a Toyota... those cars are crap!!" Sorry, but... you know?

And to me the real killer is that networking is 99.999% about being protocol implementation faithful so ALL devices of all brands should do the same damned things. (Yes, I know there are Cisco specific protocols and people should avoid them to avoid vendor lock-in.) Cisco isn't quite as bad as Microsoft, but in some ways, they're worse.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[evilviper]

How many Cisco certified people do you know that don't know anything about networking??

The CCNA was always an entry-level certification. Point me to a clueless CCNP or CCIE and I'll be surprised. Of course certification isn't a prereq for knowing what you're doing, either.

It's the brand name that makes them important and the brand name that makes these devices valuable.

There's definitely significant brand-name mark-up on their hardware, but that's NOT why Cisco is valuable. Cisco is dominant because of network effects... There are lots of people who know the Cisco ios CLI, and the intricacies of their specific product lines. This is in-part because Cisco is dominant, and it lends itself to more dominance, as saving a few hundred dollars on a switch isn't worth the retraining needed for your admin to learn to manage something different, or dealing with different support, billing, etc.

And to me the real killer is that networking is 99.999% about being protocol implementation faithful so ALL devices of all brands should do the same damned things.

Yes, and Windows and Linux can both serve web pages... Does that mean you'd just switch back and forth between them without a second thought? No, you'll stick with one or the other (whichever your IT staff is familiar with), until the benefits of the other become overwhelming, and are worth retraining or new hiring.

Cisco hardware only needs to stay inexpensive enough that it's not worth the hassle of using a different brand. If you've got a huge network, that's not the case, and a few percent savings will add up. But for smaller networks, the savings usually really isn't worth the hassle.

FWIW, I'm not a Cisco fan, but the business world isn't as irrational as you claim.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[jpedlow]

Where I work, we're a pretty heavy cisco shop.... We've got 2 CCNA's (who are both going for ccnp) and our manager is CCNP Voice. We've worked on cisco gear for years, we have experience with it and understand how it works. Cisco has the market, thats a reason, for example, why HP CLI is extremely similar. So guys like me can QUICKLY go and configure vlans or something on a switch. Saving a couple hundred on a switch if your guys have to re-learn them isn't worth while.

Would an OPENBSD rig running OOSPFD or OBGPD be cheeper? YES. Would it likely be as fast? PROBABLY (if not faster). Would anybody know how to use it? PROBABLY NOT. While it could be learned.....time has a value. The exception is if you're starting from the ground up and have IT staff and procedures of size that could actually support 'non standard' gear. AKA if you get hit by a bus and you're the only guy in your shop -- how easy would it to be to get someone up to speed on your current gear? or do you need to fly in a specialist.

TL;DR: We use the gear because we can find people who know it easily without having to fly in a specialist.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[erroneus]

That's ridiculous reasonig. It presumes people can't adapt their knowledge to new applications. I have no trouble with that.

And Cisco people come more expensively than Cisco gear. Seems to me it would be cheaper to go with something "not cisco." This is why I said "maybe worse" [than Microsoft] because they REALLY leverage their critical mass hard and they do so by creating this army of Cisco loyalists because they all have the IT industry fooled into thinking they are worth more.

None of what has been presented actually says Cisco is "superior." It all says Cisco is conveniently entrenched.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[gl4ss]

Where I work, we're a pretty heavy cisco shop.... We've got 2 CCNA's (who are both going for ccnp) and our manager is CCNP Voice. We've worked on cisco gear for years, we have experience with it and understand how it works. Cisco has the market, thats a reason, for example, why HP CLI is extremely similar. So guys like me can QUICKLY go and configure vlans or something on a switch. Saving a couple hundred on a switch if your guys have to re-learn them isn't worth while.

Would an OPENBSD rig running OOSPFD or OBGPD be cheeper? YES. Would it likely be as fast? PROBABLY (if not faster). Would anybody know how to use it? PROBABLY NOT. While it could be learned.....time has a value. The exception is if you're starting from the ground up and have IT staff and procedures of size that could actually support 'non standard' gear. AKA if you get hit by a bus and you're the only guy in your shop -- how easy would it to be to get someone up to speed on your current gear? or do you need to fly in a specialist.

TL;DR: We use the gear because we can find people who know it easily without having to fly in a specialist.

sounds to me you guys should budget a day for training and move off cisco... if not for anything else as learn it as backup, if cisco decides to alter the deal since if you're willing to pay few hundred bucks more, why not a thousand or two thousand(actually depending on the gear you are already in that territory). basically what you just said is that you can't use anything else than cisco because you use cisco while if you used anyone else's gear you could use pretty much any of anyone else's gear. good going!

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[dpilot]

Coming at that from the other side, I've been running Linux somewhere between 15 and 20 years, certainly far enough back that there was nothing like a newby distro when I began. I have a small server cluster in my home, 2 subnets, etc. I've debugged some ugly problems at home and at work, where I'm one of the local experts. (as opposed to real experts, which I'll admit that I'm not.) Given the level of deprecation generally heaped on Certifications here and other sites in the culture, I've wondered how hard it would be to go get a Certification cold. Does a decent background in theory and text file / command line configuration form a good basis, or are the Certifications all about driving dialog panels?

I heard recently that someone I know just got "Network+ Certified", whatever that means, and found that it improved his job hunt. Last I knew it hadn't resulted in a job, but at least he's getting more live interviews. That news prompted me to wonder how hard these things really were. That's not to denigrate him, just wondering if some practical basis plus a silly certification might make a good showing.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can tell most of the people posting on this forum are idiots when it comes to networking. Loading OpenWRT on your home device and messing with 6in4 and playing with iptables doesn't mean squat when it comes to big networks.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

but that's NOT why Cisco is valuable. Cisco is dominant because of network effects

This is the first time I see anyone arguing that market domination by brand X (in any market) is good because of the network effect.

There are lots of people who know the Cisco ios CLI, and the intricacies of their specific product lines.

Ditto here. The dominance of brand X is good because its products are so idiosyncratic that you need a lot of people to use it so that you could have a pool of people from which you could hire someone to manage it. I'm not sure what particular logical fallacy this is but I'm sure there is one.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[hobarrera]

Knowing Cisco and knowing networking are completely different things.

I've known a few Electrical Engineers whom I've asked about tecnical information on IPv6 routing. They insisted I didn't need to know that much (I was building my own routing box), that if I used cisco just enabling a checkbox would help me do what I wanted, there was no point in doing thing myself.

Of course, all of them cisco certified.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[evilviper]

This is the first time I see anyone arguing that market domination by brand X (in any market) is good because of the network effect.

Since there's no anti-competitive, lock-in or monopoly aspect to Cisco's dominance, you'd be hard-pressed to claim that it is harmful. I specifically pointed out that the hurdle to switching to some other vendor isn't very high, just that a mix of different network equipment is anti-productive, even if there's some up-front savings to be had.

The dominance of brand X is good because its products are so idiosyncratic that you need a lot of people to use it so that you could have a pool of people from which you could hire someone to manage it.

No. Cisco's products are no more idiosyncratic than any other networking gear. And there's no networking gear out there which you can buy and not need someone to manage.

I'm not sure what particular logical fallacy this is but I'm sure there is one.

No logical fallacy, just you playing dumb (or are you playing?).

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[hurwak-feg]

Cisco just opened up EIGRP if you haven't heard. Maybe Cisco isn't so bad. It is not Cisco's fault that there are incompetent people with credentials. It happens in every field. Cisco does make some good products. From my experience the Cisco 6500 series devices last for eons. I know I probably sound like a fan boy. I agree that creating proprietary protocols is harmful to the industry and customers. I may be wrong and a bit idealistic, but I think that companies that make good products can make money even if they don't lock in the customer.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[Anonymous Coward]

That reasoning is useless, since break even on reeducation vs. a cheapo switch happens after buying only a few. However, if you have tried to do anything advanced (like multicast) on competitior hardware, you don't dare buy anything than cisco. I cry when I see the invoice 10-30 times larger than it should, but that is just an insurance fee against substandard hardware.

Re:Can we finally replace Cisco now?

[vilanye]

Yeah, last time I checked Cisco supports cycles in VLAN's which is mathematically incompatible with graph theory which is what helps keep networking sane

. Makes it incompatible with every other switch.

. They are also about 2-3 times more expensive than quality, protocol following stuff like, um I guess Foundry is Brocade now or whatever. It has been a few years since I had to do some consulting for a research based MAN. For $30,0000 their Big Iron was on par with the $125000 solution a Cisco whore quoted me.

. The sad thing was that so many companies in the area that are Cisco slaves and have a financial interest in the MAN that I actually had to spend, no waste time adding Cisco into the mix, just because they were are terrified of upsetting Cisco and having them get back at them the next time they have to go genuflect in front of Cisco and resign support contracts.

. They knew that Foundry was the best bet given all technical and financial constraints, but they actually feared a report from me that didn't even consider them. The MAN had to be able to extend into 5 University networks, the local symphony orchestra network(seriously, they do cool stuff with their network), a building that hosts and helps various startups, some supercomputers, and future unknown networks. Most were Cisco but a few had Foundry gear and at least one had some 3Com stuff. No way that a central switch in a star topology would work with Cisco gear, at least with out a significant investment of time and money.

. And people willingly lock themselves into Cisco, simply amazing. Microsoft is downright angelic compared to the vile demons at Cisco.

so sick of this shit.

[nimbius]

another startup makes the front pages of slasahdot by dick-riding a successful open source project, closing it off as best it can, and giving neither a link to the source nor direct credit. I dont see GPL anywhere on the site.

by ipv4 and ipv6, do we mean we ticked the little boxes in menuconfig before we compiled debian? because im pretty fucking sure linux has been doing both protocols since 2006.

Programmable datacenter is to google as lights out datacenter was to AOL as smart datacenter was to AT&T. its not actually meant to be an implementable technology any different than that which would be crafted by skilled engineers, architects, and programmers. Its just a neat word to gin up the stock.

'network orchestration hooks.' get ready for support contracts, strategic partnerships, and sla's, because ive never had to use them before to route ipv6, and im not sure how ill use them in the future to do so.

Almost everything from service to download requires me to log in, which certainly betrays the 'used to work at cisco' part of TFS

Re:so sick of this shit.

[Anonymous Coward]

The GPL is mentioned in numerous spots along with github links to code. Eat shit, Real Admiral Neckbeard.

Re:so sick of this shit.

[D1G1T]

Cumulus' product appears to be a full blown debian port that runs directly on cheap chinese 48 port switches. Seems pretty useful to me. Feel free to point out alternatives.

Re:so sick of this shit.

[Tailhook]

giving neither a link to the source nor direct credit. I dont see GPL anywhere on the site.

There are multiple direct source links here, each with related licenses called out. The GPL licence is mentioned multiple times on that page.

nor direct credit

Direct credit appears in several places, including here.

"The Cumulus Linux software distribution is based on Debian. It provides the same Linux capabilities as Debian with the addition of networking packages."

None of this is more than 1 or 2 clicks into the public site. Stop making stuff up.

Re:so sick of this shit.

[johanwanderer]

Cumulus' product appears to be a full blown debian port that runs directly on expensive 48 port switches. Seems pretty useful to me. Feel free to point out alternatives.

FTFY...
Last I look, a Quanta 1GB switch is in the 3K range, and the 10GB switch is in the 11K range.

Here is the list of supported switches: http://cumulusnetworks.com/support/hcl/

Re:so sick of this shit.

[Anonymous Coward]

Useful to do what. What datacenter have you worked in were the core router was a cheap chinese 48 port switch?

Re:so sick of this shit.

[D1G1T]

$3K for a layer 3 switch with 48 1Gb ports and 4 10Gb ports seems pretty cheap to me. Feel free to point out alternatives.

Re:so sick of this shit.

[Anonymous Coward]

Allied Telesis... but you would know that if you knew about networking and how Cumulus is exactly the crap nimbius said it was.

Re:so sick of this shit.

[Anonymous Coward]

And what kind of reputation does Allied Telesis have (esp. amongst its users?)

It's called Linux, not GNU/Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

The proper name of the OS is Linux, not GNU/Linux. Jesus, it's right there in the official announcement, people.

God save us from GNU zealots. This is why I still recommend Windows and OS X to my friends and family, because I don't hate them enough to expose them to GNU zealots.

Re:It's called Linux, not GNU/Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Unknown Lamer loves when Stallman's dick is shoved up his pooper.

Re:It's called Linux, not GNU/Linux

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been looking for a 3D printable model of Stallman's dick. Where can I find one?

--
BMO

Re:It's called Linux, not GNU/Linux

[gl4ss]

I've been looking for a 3D printable model of Stallman's dick. Where can I find one?

--
BMO

here you go http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:41779

Linux is just the kernel

[Anonymous Coward]

The proper name of the OS is Linux, not GNU/Linux. Jesus, it's right there in the official announcement, people.

The full or proper name of the O/S is GNU/Linux, since the user-space is GNU and the kernel is Linux. The terminology is intended to be fully descriptive.

It's the same with Android which uses a Linux kernel so the full name of the O/S is Android/Linux, but if you ran the Android user-space on top of a BSD kernel then it would be Android/BSD. And so on.

Re:Linux is just the kernel

[Anonymous Coward]

No, that's not the "proper" name since it excludes all the other pieces of userland that aren't GNU which make up a Linux distro. But since adding those pieces into the name can't be used to stroke Stallman's ego so they get excluded for no good reason.

Re:Linux is just the kernel

[devman]

At the risk of feeding a troll...

The name of this particular OS is 'Cumulus Linux'. 'GNU/Linux' is not an operating system, It is a family or stack of software. When you create your own OS distro feel free to name it 'AC's GNU/Linux'. As a corollary, Android is not and has never been 'Android/Linux'. The name of the OS is 'Android'. If you want to use GNU/Linux to describe the software running in a particular OS that is fine, but it is not the name of the OS.

Andreeson Horowitz funded startup

[charnov]

This is a Andreeson Horowitz funded startup founded in 2010. The principles are JR Rivers (formerly of Cisco and Google) http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jr-rivers/3/3b7/372 and Nolan Leake (formerly of Tile and 3Leaf) http://www.linkedin.com/in/nolan. They're pretty darn smart cookies.

That said, I wonder if they are trying to gain some momentum (there seem to be quite a few major players in the SDN crowd since they founded their company) or if they have run out of steam and are trying to get the Open Source crowd involved on the development side... worth keeping an eye on, I guess.

Re:Andreeson Horowitz funded startup

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would vyatta not jump this wagon?

Where to buy?

[rainer_d]

Do they only sell to "large" customers, buying a couple of hundreds a time?
What does such a switch cost, compared to a Switch from Cisco or HP?

Vyatta got bought by Brocade

[charnov]

Vyatta is owned by Brocade now. It's not in their best interest to support other hardware vendors. Cumulus is aiming to support all hardware. That's the piece that kills everyone: poor interoperability.