Life After VMware - A summary and comparison of hypervisors!

Summary

In this comprehensive video, the host dives into the world of hypervisor alternatives to VMware ESXi, focusing on four key platforms: XCP-ng, Proxmox, Hyper-V, and Nutanix. Each platform is evaluated based on features, limitations, storage capabilities, backup solutions, live migration, workload balancing, high availability, user interface, minimum hardware requirements, and cost. The host emphasizes the rapid changes in the virtualization space and the growing support for open-source hypervisors from third-party vendors. While no definitive recommendation is made, insights are provided into the strengths of each platform, suggesting XCP-ng for its similarity to VMware, Proxmox for those with older hardware or needing container support, Hyper-V for Windows-centric environments, and Nutanix for those already invested in hyperconverged infrastructure.

Takeaways

• 📚 **VMware Alternatives**: The video series evaluates xcp-ng, Proxmox, Hyper-V, and Nutanix as alternatives to VMware ESXi and vCenter for home labs and businesses.
• 🆓 **Free Options**: xcp-ng and Proxmox are free, offering vCenter equivalent features, with Hyper-V being mostly free with some limitations on Linux OS compatibility.
• 🖥️ **User Interface (UI) and Experience**: Zen Orchestra for xcp-ng is basic but being updated, Proxmox's UI is cluttered, Hyper-V has a dull experience, and Nutanix's Prism Element is clean and user-friendly.
• 💻 **Minimum Hardware Requirements**: xcp-ng and Proxmox require a 64-bit CPU with varying RAM and storage needs, Hyper-V requires a Windows Server setup, and Nutanix has the most stringent requirements.
• 💾 **Storage Support**: All hypervisors support most storage types, with Nutanix being the outlier, only supporting hyperconverged storage within the cluster.
• 🔄 **Live Migration**: All platforms support live migration of VMs, except for Proxmox's LXC containers which require a shutdown before migration.
• 🤖 **Workload Balancing**: xcp-ng and Hyper-V offer automated workload balancing, Proxmox does not but has community scripts to help, and Nutanix supports workload bouncing.
• 🔒 **High Availability**: All hypervisors support high availability, restarting VMs on different hosts in case of host failure.
• 💰 **Cost and Support**: Support options and costs vary widely, with xcp-ng and Proxmox offering community to premium support tiers, Hyper-V being part of Windows Server costs, and Nutanix details not publicly disclosed.
• ⚙️ **Deployment and Management**: xcp-ng is most analogous to vCenter, making it familiar for VMware users, Proxmox offers advanced features for those comfortable with manual setup, and Nutanix is best for those invested in HCI.
• 🚀 **Rapid Market Changes**: The hypervisor and virtualization space is evolving quickly, with third-party backup solutions now supporting open-source hypervisors, indicating a responsive market to customer demands.

Q & A

What is the purpose of the final video in the series?

The purpose of the final video is to aggregate and summarize the information from the last four videos, providing a roundup and a comprehensive overview of the alternatives to VMware ESXi and vCenter in a home lab or business environment.

Which hypervisors were discussed as alternatives to VMware ESXi?

The hypervisors discussed as alternatives to VMware ESXi are XCP-ng, Proxmox, Hyper-V, and Nutanix.

What are the key differences between XCP-ng and VMware vCenter?

XCP-ng is the most analogous to ESXi and vCenter, and it is free. It is based on Linux, entirely open source, and can be managed using the Zen Orchestra Appliance or a deployment of Zen Orchestra.

What is unique about Proxmox's deployment and features?

Proxmox is entirely open source, based on Debian with a customized Linux kernel, and uses KVM for running VMs and LXC for running Linux containers. It supports a wide range of storage formats and deployment types and is known for its robust feature set, including SEF and ZFS.

How does Hyper-V differ from the other hypervisors mentioned?

Hyper-V is a component of Windows Server and is closed source. It is deployed after setting up the Windows Server OS and can have different footprints based on the version of Windows Server used. Hyper-V is particularly well-suited for Windows shops.

What are the storage deployment limitations of Nutanix?

Nutanix is an outlier as it only supports hyperconverged storage within the cluster itself, meaning there is no support for external storage access such as SAN or NAS.

What backup solutions are available for these hypervisors?

XCP-ng has built-in backup and restore functionality and supports Veeam as a third-party backup solution. Proxmox features native backup and restore functionality through Proxmox Backup Server, with upcoming Veeam integration. Hyper-V is natively supported by major backup vendors, and Nutanix has native support for Veeam, Rubrik, and others.

How do the hypervisors compare in terms of live migration and workload balancing?

All hypervisors support live migration of virtual machine workloads between hosts. XCP-ng automatically migrates VMs based on CPU load, Proxmox does not have built-in automated workload balancing but has community scripts for it, Hyper-V supports workload balancing for both RAM and CPU, and Nutanix supports workload bouncing across the cluster.

Which hypervisor has the most user-friendly interface?

Nutanix's Prism Element is noted for its clean, simple, and elegant interface, which is considered by many to be superior to VMware's offerings. It provides great graphing, alerting, and VM management out of the box.

What are the minimum hardware requirements for running XCP-ng?

XCP-ng requires a 64-bit x86 CPU running at a minimum of 1.5 GHz, with a 2 GHz and greater multi-core CPU recommended. It also requires a minimum of 2 GB of RAM, with 4 GB or more recommended, and a minimum of 46 GB of disk space, with 70 GB recommended.

How does the cost and support structure for these hypervisors differ?

XCP-ng offers two tiers of support with different features and response times. Proxmox has four support tiers, from community support to premium. Hyper-V is essentially free with Windows Server, with pricing based on the version chosen. Nutanix does not publish retail costs publicly and is only available through channel partners.

What is the recommended approach for someone deciding between these hypervisors?

The choice depends on the user's specific needs, priorities, and existing infrastructure. XCP-ng is most analogous to VMware, making it a good choice for those looking for a familiar environment. Proxmox is suitable for those with older hardware or needing LXC container support. Hyper-V is a good fit for Windows-centric environments. Nutanix is ideal for those already using hyperconverged infrastructure.

Outlines

00:00

😀 Evaluating Hypervisor Alternatives to VMware

The first paragraph introduces the video series focused on assessing options for transitioning from VMware and ESXi. The host, Rich, acknowledges the necessity of summarizing the previous four videos, which covered xcp-ng, Proxmox, Hyper-V, and Nutanix as alternatives. The paragraph emphasizes the importance of comparing features and limitations of each platform to aid viewers in making informed decisions. It also touches on the operating systems underlying these hypervisors, their deployment methods, and the flexibility they offer in terms of storage solutions.

05:01

🛡️ Backup Solutions and Live Migration Features

The second paragraph delves into the critical aspects of backup solutions and live migration capabilities of the discussed hypervisors. It highlights the native backup functionalities of xcp-ng and Proxmox, the support for major backup vendors for Hyper-V, and the native support for backup solutions in Nutanix. The paragraph also discusses live migration, automated workload balancing, and high availability features across all four platforms, providing insights into how each hypervisor performs these tasks.

10:02

🖥️ User Interface and Experience Comparison

The third paragraph compares the user interfaces and experiences of the four hypervisor platforms. It critiques the dated interface of xcp-ng's Zen Orchestra, the cluttered UI of Proxmox, the less-than-ideal experience of Hyper-V for non-System Center users, and the clean and modern UI of Nutanix's Prism Element. The paragraph also covers the minimum hardware requirements for each hypervisor, emphasizing the varying demands they place on system resources. It concludes with a discussion on cost and support options available for each platform, noting the rapid changes in the market and the importance of choosing a hypervisor that aligns with one's specific needs and priorities.

Keywords

💡VMware ESXi

VMware ESXi is a type of hypervisor developed by VMware for virtualizing computing resources. It is a core component of VMware's virtualization platform and is widely used in data centers for creating and managing virtual machines. In the video, it is discussed as a point of comparison for other hypervisors, as the speaker evaluates alternatives to ESXi for home labs and businesses.

💡Hyper-V

Hyper-V is a virtualization technology from Microsoft that allows multiple operating systems to run on a single physical machine. It is part of Windows Server and is used to improve efficiency and scalability of computing resources. The script mentions Hyper-V as one of the alternatives to VMware ESXi, noting its compatibility and management features.

💡Proxmox

Proxmox is an open-source server virtualization management solution that uses KVM as a hypervisor and is designed to provide a complete, integrated virtualization environment. The video discusses Proxmox as an alternative to VMware, highlighting its free version, feature set, and the ability to run Linux containers.

💡HCI (Hyper-Converged Infrastructure)

HCI refers to technology that integrates compute, storage, networking, and virtualization resources into a single system to simplify management and enable scalability. The video mentions HCI in the context of Nutanix, a company specializing in such systems, and discusses it as a suitable environment for certain types of businesses and users.

💡Live Migration

Live migration is a feature of hypervisors that allows virtual machines to be moved from one physical host to another without downtime. This is important for maintaining high availability and load balancing in virtualized environments. The script discusses live migration as a core feature supported by the hypervisors being compared.

💡Zen Orchestra

Zen Orchestra is a management tool for XCP-ng, another open-source hypervisor. It is used to manage and orchestrate virtual machines within an XCP-ng environment. The video mentions Zen Orchestra in the context of XCP-ng's management capabilities and an upcoming UI/UX refresh.

💡Backup Solutions

Backup solutions are systems and services designed to back up data to prevent data loss and enable recovery in case of failures. The video discusses the importance of backup solutions for the various hypervisors, noting that third-party support for open-source hypervisors like XCP-ng and Proxmox has improved.

💡DRS (Distributed Resource Scheduler)

DRS is a feature of VMware that automatically balances computing resources in a virtualized environment. It is mentioned in the context of comparing automated workload balancing features across different hypervisors, as an equivalent functionality is sought in the alternatives to VMware ESXi.

💡High Availability (HA)

High Availability in the context of virtualization refers to systems being configured to ensure that virtual machines remain operational and continue to run even if the underlying physical hardware fails. The script discusses HA as a core feature present in all the hypervisors being evaluated.

💡User Interface (UI) and User Experience (UX)

UI and UX refer to the design and usability of a software's user interface and the overall experience of a product from the user's perspective. The video provides a critique of the UI/UX of the hypervisors' management tools, noting the differences in design, functionality, and ease of use.

💡Minimum Hardware Requirements

Minimum hardware requirements are the least amount of computing resources needed to run a particular software or system. The script discusses these requirements for different hypervisors, emphasizing the need for users to ensure their hardware can support the chosen virtualization platform.

Highlights

The series on life after VM War concludes with a roundup summarizing the last four videos.

All hypervisors discussed can replace VMware ESXi and even vCenter, with details varying.

XCP-ng is the most analogous to ESXi and vCenter, and is free.

Proxmox supports vCenter equivalent features, LXC container support, and is also free.

Hyper-V is suitable for Windows shops with some Linux OS compatibility exceptions.

Nutanix is best for VMware users and businesses invested in HCI or hyper-converged infrastructure.

XCP-ng and Proxmox are open-source with Linux roots, while Hyper-V is closed-source.

XCP-ng and Proxmox support various storage deployment methods, including HCI.

Nutanix supports only hyper-converged storage within the cluster.

XCP-ng and Proxmox have built-in backup and restore functionality, with third-party solutions emerging.

Hyper-V is natively supported by major backup vendors, and Nutanix has native support for various backup solutions.

All hypervisors support live migration of workloads, except for LXC containers in Proxmox which require shutdown.

XCP-ng offers automated workload balancing based on CPU load.

Hyper-V supports workload balancing for both RAM and CPU utilization.

Nutanix supports workload bouncing across the cluster, similar to VMware.

All four hypervisors support high availability as a core feature.

XCP-ng's Zen Orchestra interface is basic but undergoing a refresh for a modernized UI/UX.

Proxmox's UI/UX is cluttered and in need of improvement, though it offers extensive Linux functionality.

Hyper-V's user experience is considered the worst among the four, especially without System Center.

Nutanix's Prism Element offers a clean, simple, and elegant UI, superior to VMware in many ways.

Minimum hardware requirements vary among the hypervisors, with Nutanix having the most stringent requirements.

Support and cost structures differ; XCP-ng and Proxmox offer tiered support options, while Hyper-V is included with Windows Server.

Nutanix's pricing and support details are not publicly disclosed, but it offers both hardware and software solutions.

The choice of hypervisor depends on individual priorities and use cases, with each platform having its strengths and weaknesses.

Transcripts

I really thought I was done after the

last video but as many of you pointed

out and rightfully so my series on life

after VM War wasn't complete without a

Roundup summarizing the last four videos

so let's get to

it hey there H lobers self hosters it

pros and Engineers Rich here welcome to

the final final video on evaluating your

options if you're coming from the world

of VMware and esxi with this video being

my Opus my kudagra the finale of the

series that has taken up practically

four solid months of my time in this

video I'm going to attempt to Aggregate

and summarize as much of the information

as I can from the last four videos put a

nice little bow on it and hand it over

to you in the last four videos I looked

at xcp proxmox hyperv and finally new

tanx as alternatives to VMware esxi and

Venter in your home lab and for your

business all four platforms have pros

and cons so I'm going to attempt to

compare them based on their featur and

limitations in the hopes that this

summary gives you some ideas on which

direction you want to take with your

gear or business if you haven't watched

those videos I encourage you to do so

one so you know what I'm talking about

in the amount of research that went into

the summary and two to feed that YouTube

algorithm baby I'm kidding of course

what I do think though is watching those

videos will help you understand how I

came to my conclusions so with that it's

time to commit Death by PowerPoint the

first stop in our summary here is to

answer the most obvious question can

product X replace vmore in your business

or home lab for the most part all of

these hypervisors will replace vmor esxi

and even V Center but the devil friends

is always in the details let's dig in X

cpng yes hands down it is the most

analogous to esxi EnV Center and is free

proxmox yes absolutely with vcenter

equivalent features and added lxt

container support and as a friend in our

Discord is fond of saying we'll run on a

potato and is also free hyperv mostly

yes with the exception of some Linux OS

compatibility it will serve Windows

shops well and has Venter equivalent

features new tanic yes best suited for

VMware users and businesses already

invested in HCI or hyperon converged

infrastructure all of these hypervisors

will run VMS without issue and with the

exception of hyperv are either free or

have a free version that you can run in

your home lab or use to personally

evaluate it for your business before we

go deeper down the rabbit hole here

let's talk a bit about their underlying

operating systems and how they're

deployed xcp and's Roots come from the

hypervisor is based on Linux and is

entirely open source a standard

deployment of xcp consists of one or

more xcp hosts for running virtual

workloads and either the Zen Orchestra

Appliance also known as xoa or a

deployment of Zen Orchestra to manage X

cpng from a singular xoa or EXO

deployment you can manage VMS build

clusters and so on proxmox is also

entirely open source is based on Debian

with a customized Linux kernel uses KVM

for running VMS and lxc for running

Linux containers deployment of proxmox

consists of one or more independent

proxmox hosts each having their own

respective management web-based consoles

and from there you can manage vm's build

clusters and so on Microsoft hyperv is a

component of Windows server and as such

is deployed after a complete setup of

the Windows Server OS because Microsoft

offers both core and the full desktop

experience version of the Windows Server

Footprints of a hyperv deployment can be

dramatically different and management

can be done through a variety of

different consoles hyperv is entirely

closed Source lastly new tanic new tank

is comprised of a few different

deployment components ah or the

Acropolis hypervisor is the native

hypervisor that runs virtual machines

ahp is based on C OS at the time of this

video and uses KVM for virtualization in

a typical nanic deployment the

hypervisor is deployed first followed by

the CVM or controller virtual machine

there is one dedicated CVM running on

each ahv host the CVM is responsible for

all management aspects of new tanic from

configuration management storage

management cluster management and

virtual machine man management to the

guey all of those aspects run within the

CVM and while the native operating

system is open source all components of

nanic are closed Source now let's get

more specific starting with storage and

supported storage types and deployments

xcp andg supports a variety of different

storage deployment methods from local

storage to NFS and icui to HCI storage

using exos San X cpng is capable of

supporting most All Storage deployment

types proxmox like xcp is an equal

opportunity storage consumer proxmox

will will support local storage NFS SE

for HCI storage and many many more

storage formats and deployment types

hyperv is Windows and as such supports

all the same storage types that the

windows OS will from local to shared

storage via is scuzzi and so on new

tanks is the outlier among the group

it's only hypercon converged and as such

supports hypercon converged storage from

within the cluster itself this means no

external storage access with nanic

period no Sands nothing with the

exception of nanic how you present your

storage to your hypervisor won't be a

limitation if you have a sand bring your

sand if you want to build a hyper

converage cluster all of them basically

have the feature set to accommodate HCI

next stop is to compare backup solutions

for these platforms After All Storage is

great but without backup and restore

you're just waiting for failure xcp has

built-in backup and restore

functionality and most recently supports

convolt as a thirdparty backup solution

with TOS of V ongoing proxmox also

features native backup and restore

functionality through proxmox backup

server and there are public

announcements of VH integration on the

horizon hyperv is natively supported by

all major backup vendors including vhm

comall rubric and many others new tanks

has native support for vhm rubric

convolt Haiku and others when we started

this video series the landscape looked

so much different than it does right now

months back the open source hypervisors

had absolutely no third-party backup

support and now thankfully the market

has responded and xcp and proxmox are

seeing the Enterprise backup vendors

stepping up and offering support for

their platforms this is huge for those

platforms because having those options

make those platforms more appealing to

businesses that have already invested a

ton of time and money into those

thirdparty backup Solutions all right

let's dig into live migration workload

balancing and high availability features

first on the list is live migration of

workloads all hypervisors are able to

migrate live virtual machine workloads

between different hosts in a cluster

with the exception of proxmox and LXE

containers you can migrate an lxc

container from one host to another but

the lxc contain must be shut down before

migrating to another host in proxmox

next is automated workload balancing in

the world of VMware we call this DRS or

distributed resource scheduling let's

see how the Alternatives Stack Up xcp

will automatically migrate virtual

machine workloads between hosts to

balance load in the cluster workload

balancing is based on CPU load only

proxmox does not have an automated

workload balancing functionality built

in however there are ways of automating

workload balancing via community scripts

to automate moving workloads and

automated workload balancing is on their

road map hyperv supports work low

balancing for both Ram utilization and

CPU utilization of VMS in a cluster and

can be managed by using the hyperv

failover cluster manager and lastly new

tanks natively supports worklow bouncing

across the cluster similar to VMware all

four hypervisors also support High

availability as a core feature of their

clustering and will restart VMS on

different hosts in a cluster if a host

fails or goes offline so let's talk

about one of my favorite subjects the

user interface and the user experience

of these four more hypervisors X cpg's

Zen Orchestra guy in its current state

is pretty basic and feels dated with a

fair bit of wasted space but entirely

functional that being said however Vates

is working hard on an entirely refreshed

uiux for Zen orchestra that will

modernize the user experience proxmox is

a hot mess of menus and submenus at the

risk of catching heat from devoted

proxmox users the uiux is ugly cluttered

missing coherency throughout and needs

some serious TLC that being said it has

great graphing and you can do basically

every Linux function you'd want through

the GUI out of all four hypervisor uis I

think that hyperv has to be the worst

experience for those of us who don't use

system center using hyperv manager is a

painful visually dull experience thanks

to the Microsoft Management console

framework and requires you to go to

different MMC consoles to manage

different aspects of the hypervisor then

there's nanic and prism element prism

element is really nice it's clean simple

and elegant and in many ways better than

VMware by broadcom's offerings prism

element and the greater Central

Management console have fantastic

graphing alerting and VM management out

of the box now let's talk about minimum

Hardware requirements after all if you

only have a potato to run your

hypervisor on then you need to make sure

that your hypervisor will run on a

potato X cpng requires a 64-bit x86 CPU

running at a minimum of 1.5 GHz with a 2

GHz and greater multi-core CPU

recommended xcp requires a minimum of 2

GB of RAM with 4 gigs and more being

recommended minimum of 46 GB of disc

space is required with 70 GB being

recommended proxmox also requires a

64-bit xa6 CPU but does not list a

minimum clock speed requirement proxmox

requires a minimum of 1 GB of RAM but

recommends 2 GB for the host and more

for virtual machines proxmox does not

have a minimum storage requirement

hyperv requires Windows server to

function So based on the current Windows

Server 2022 minimum requirements you

need at least a 64-bit xa6 CPU with a

clock speed of 1.4 GHz a minimum of 2 GB

of RAM and at least 32 GB of storage

space for the OS install new tanks

requirements are the most stringent

among the group if you're going to use

Intel your Intel CPU needs to be at

least a Sandy Bridge generation and for

AMD CPUs must be Zen or newer you'll

need at least 32 GB of RAM for the host

you'll need at least three different

storage targets for installation your

cold storage tier needs to be at least

500 GB in size your hot storage tier

will need to be at least 200 GB or

greater and the ahv hypervisor will

require at least 32 GB of storage for

the installation and for the

business-minded of you watching this

let's talk about cost and support

starting off with xcp Vates the company

behind xcp currently offers two

different tiers of support the first

tier known as Vates VMS Pro cost $1,000

per host per year includes technical

support Zen Orchestra Enterprise

unlimited support tickets and a one

business day response time for $1,800

per host per year you can sign up for

Vates VMS Enterprise which gives you

access to Greater support experts more

Enterprise features in Zen Orchestra

initial setups support and more and

comes with a 1-hour response time for

critical issues proxmox has four

different tiers of support starting with

the lowest community community support

costs €100 per socket per year and gives

you access to their Enterprise repos all

of the features and community support

for €340 a year per socket you can

purchase basic that gives you all the

community features plus access to the

customer portal and three support

tickets a year with a response time of

one business day next is their standard

offering for € 510 per year per socket

giving you access to all the lower tiers

features but with 10 tickets per year

4-Hour response time during business

hours remote SSH support and offline

subscription key activation and lastly

their premium offering for € 1,020 per

year per socket again you get all the

lower tiers offerings but with unlimited

tickets and 2hour response time during

business hours Microsoft being Microsoft

makes pricing complicated since hyperv

is essentially free with Windows Server

your cost is going to be based on what

version of Windows Server you choose to

deploy for Windows Server 2022 the data

center version clocks in at

$615 USD and licenses you to run

unlimited windows VMS in hyperv the

Standard Edition comes in at $1,069 USD

and allows you up to two licensed

Windows VMS there are no licensing

requirements for Linux VMS when it comes

to actual support well you're going to

have to pay for that in addition lastly

new tanx unfortunately here's where we

reach a problem new tanic does not sell

directly to people and only through

Channel vars and as I've been told by

people inside nanic they do not publish

their retail cost publicly because the

perceived undercutting of the channel

Partners all this means I don't have

real numbers for what new tanks actually

cost to purchase and the support that's

provided I can say that you can purchase

new tanks as an entire TurnKey

deployment with super micro based

Hardware or just software to run on your

own Hardware as long as your Hardware

meets the new tanx hardware

compatibility list where does this leave

us well here's the thing just in the

last 4 months we've seen an incredible

amount of change in the hypervisor and

on premise virtualization space all of

these companies and many many more are

aggressively taking advantage of the

whole that broadcom left with VMware a

perfect example of this is the

thirdparty backup Solutions both xcbg

and proxmox were happily running their

own backup and Recovery Solutions with

zero interest in third party Solutions

once that broadcom bomb dropped those

companies responded to customer demands

to support those Solutions and we're now

seeing changes happening in real time I

don't know about you but I don't think

I've ever seen such a change occur in a

technology space this quickly just

imagine what the space will look like in

a year from now in terms of what

hypervisor I recommend you switch to

well you're not going to get that answer

from me all these platforms have their

strengths and weaknesses and your

priorities are going to drive which

direction you decide to go I will say

the following though X cpng will be the

most analist to vmw and Venter in terms

of deployment management and familiarity

and I say this because Zen server and

esxi have a lot of competitive history

the deployment concept is very similar

and thus have a lower learning curve

xcbg is a fantastic solution solution

prox MOX will likely be more beneficial

for those of you running on older

Hardware need lxc container support and

are not afraid to get your hands dirty

maning features like SEF ZFS and a ton

more proxmox is also a fantastic

solution I personally dislike hyperv but

as many of you reminded me in the

comparison it has its place especially

in environments where people have

already purchased Microsoft server and

are predominantly Windows shops the

familiarity of Windows makes it a viable

solution for Windows people who just

want to run a few VMS and that leaves

new tanx I'm not going to lie the prism

element and prism Central user

experiences is what all goys should be

like and it's hard not to fall in love

with that UI that being said new tanx

currently only lives in a hypercon

converged world and for many of us who

use a sand new tanx has no plate and

that is a damn shame on the other hand

people coming from vmore HCI like a Dell

VX rail platform will be very happy with

new tanx as an

alternative and that friends will do it

for this video and the life after VMware

series if you liked it throw us a sub

and a like and if you have a beef with

anything I've said here let me know in

the comments below special thank you to

YouTube members you guys help keep the

lights on and we thank you for it if

you'd like to help support the channel

consider becoming a member or buy some

of our swag it all helps us keep making

these videos and now that you finished

watching this video how about checking

out our playlist over here of other

great homelab and self-hosting videos

we've done in the past if you're looking

for your next great homelab idea we can

help

[Music]