Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 100
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Above The Clouds
    Posts
    7,223

    Cloud Linux is not Cloud Hosting

    Seeing quite a few hosts that use CloudLinux state on their sites that they offer Cloud Hosting. CloudLinux is just an OS, whereas Cloud Hosting depends on architecture.

    I could make a brand new Linux distro and call it WindowsLinux, doesn't mean it is Windows, heh,

    Discuss.
    Laurence Flynn @ HostNEXUS.com
    Managed WordPress Hosting Solutions
    Focused on speed. Obsessed with security.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    10,710
    I haven't noticed hosts doing that. Are you sure they are not actually using a 'cloud' environment in addition to CloudLinux (I know some hosts that are doing this)?

    But anyway, even if they are simply using CloudLinux, the simple answer is that this is all for marketing purposes. I consider 'cloud' to be a marketing term at this point in any case.

  3. #3
    Speedysparrow was using VPS.net, so they were offering true cloud hosting solutions according to the vps.net architecture.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,030
    Sometime last year this was also discussed. CloudLinux is now branded as the "Cloud Ready OS". Cloud can be SaaS, PaaS, and IaaS. The problem comes in when most people here refer to IaaS, and rightfully so. Web Hosting providers are normally IaaS, sometimes PaaS.

    Companies that you have mentioned above appear to be claiming Cloud when in fact they are lacking the underlying inrfastructure to truly be, Cloud. Even if they are selling PaaS and not IaaS, the infrastructure of their business must be Cloud as a standard shared web hosting platform, vps platform, etc are not Cloud if they lack the required components of Cloud.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by layer0 View Post
    I haven't noticed hosts doing that. Are you sure they are not actually using a 'cloud' environment in addition to CloudLinux (I know some hosts that are doing this)?

    But anyway, even if they are simply using CloudLinux, the simple answer is that this is all for marketing purposes. I consider 'cloud' to be a marketing term at this point in any case.
    You are welcome to your opinion, but Cloud is not a marketing term. It is much more defined and there are standards being set. Besides companies like Tier 1 Research and the 451 Group, the US Government, and even providers are continuing to properly define and establish the definition.

    Marketing terms are things like "compute cycles" and "overselling".

  6. #6

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by CloudWeb View Post
    You are welcome to your opinion, but Cloud is not a marketing term. It is much more defined and there are standards being set. Besides companies like Tier 1 Research and the 451 Group, the US Government, and even providers are continuing to properly define and establish the definition.

    Marketing terms are things like "compute cycles" and "overselling".
    Excellent point. The importance of standards for something as dynamic as 'cloud computing' and 'cloud hosting' can't be overstated in order for consumer to really adopt the technology. The clearer everything is explained to end users, the better for everyone involved.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    As defined in wikipedia:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing
    "Cloud computing is location-independent computing, whereby shared servers provide resources, software, and data to computers and other devices on demand, as with the electricity grid."

    I am sorry, but I cannot see a place where "cloud" is nwell defined term in any way or form. While elasticity, scalability, reliability are often considered to be "cloud" related qualities -- even that is not easily defined.
    For example:
    Try to scale single instance on AWS -- you have to create new instance, and even that is not scalable beyond one real server -- so you have to get more instances.
    Reliability -- same story here, your instance on AWS can go down at any moment. Most likely it will be down more often then dedicated server.
    Elasticity -- well, what does that term really mean?

    So, I kind of disagree with bashing people for something that doesn't agree with "your" definition of the cloud.

    And just for the record: I don't think that putting CloudLinux on a single shared hosting server makes that shared hosting a cloud. In my view, for it to be considered a cloud. Most likely -- I am incorrect, but that is my wishful thinking of how cloud hosting should be defined.
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by CloudWeb View Post
    You are welcome to your opinion, but Cloud is not a marketing term. It is much more defined and there are standards being set. Besides companies like Tier 1 Research and the 451 Group, the US Government, and even providers are continuing to properly define and establish the definition.

    Marketing terms are things like "compute cycles" and "overselling".
    I also agree, There is what I believe to be a certian standard, sort of like PCI Compliance Standards, or SAS 70, or some of the others. To me there are a set of rules you must abid by to be a "cloud" hoster.

    1. Centralized Storage
    2. N+1 In the event a switch fails, do you have a hot standby?
    3. Automatic failover (WITHOUT HUMAN INTERVENTION)
    4. Scalability
    5. I think being able to do load balancing and stuff is pretty important, but I dont think this is a limiting factor.

    If you can obtain these sort of standards, Im sure there are a few things i've missed. But these are the basis.

    Marketing... LOL. I guess it depends on what kind of cloud your thinking of..
    Michael Wallace - michael@innoscale.net
    Innovative Scaling Technologies Inc. - A Cloud Service Provider
    24/7 Support, Call us @ 1-307-200-4880
    www.innoscale.net - Seattle, Silicon Valley, Dallas, Chicago, Washington D.C., and Europe

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by iseletsk View Post
    As defined in wikipedia:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing
    "Cloud computing is location-independent computing, whereby shared servers provide resources, software, and data to computers and other devices on demand, as with the electricity grid."

    I am sorry, but I cannot see a place where "cloud" is nwell defined term in any way or form. While elasticity, scalability, reliability are often considered to be "cloud" related qualities -- even that is not easily defined.
    For example:
    Try to scale single instance on AWS -- you have to create new instance, and even that is not scalable beyond one real server -- so you have to get more instances.
    Reliability -- same story here, your instance on AWS can go down at any moment. Most likely it will be down more often then dedicated server.
    Elasticity -- well, what does that term really mean?

    So, I kind of disagree with bashing people for something that doesn't agree with "your" definition of the cloud.

    And just for the record: I don't think that putting CloudLinux on a single shared hosting server makes that shared hosting a cloud. In my view, for it to be considered a cloud. Most likely -- I am incorrect, but that is my wishful thinking of how cloud hosting should be defined.
    The wikipedia article also states that device and location independence is a key feature of Cloud. Cloud Linux is not device or location independent, it's just an OS that is not utilizing multiple servers or locations. This is a part of the requirement that goes into further defining reliability as there needs to be a level of redundancy in the environment.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    Michael,

    Who came up with this "standard"? Which governing body approved it? Where I can read about it?
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by CloudWeb View Post
    The wikipedia article also states that device and location independence is a key feature of Cloud. Cloud Linux is not device or location independent, it's just an OS that is not utilizing multiple servers or locations. This is a part of the requirement that goes into further defining reliability as there needs to be a level of redundancy in the environment.
    As I stated -- I don't consider server with CloudLinux to be a Cloud.

    Yet, for shared hosting customer, device and location independence is there. They really don't need to know if they are hosted on particular server (you can always move them to another shared hosting server) nor location (do most customer's care in which DC they are?).

    Reliability: Would multiple power supplies satisfy reliability? What about multiple network connections? RAID disks?
    Try AWS instance -- see how reliable it is. Yet, AWS is considered to be a cloud.

    I am sorry, but Cloud is used as a marketing term. It was created as a marketing term -- and there is very little in terms of technical definition of what "cloud" should really be.

    And just in case -- no, CloudLinux is not a Cloud. I agree with that
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by iseletsk View Post
    As I stated -- I don't consider server with CloudLinux to be a Cloud.

    Yet, for shared hosting customer, device and location independence is there. They really don't need to know if they are hosted on particular server (you can always move them to another shared hosting server) nor location (do most customer's care in which DC they are?).

    Reliability: Would multiple power supplies satisfy reliability? What about multiple network connections? RAID disks?
    Try AWS instance -- see how reliable it is. Yet, AWS is considered to be a cloud.

    I am sorry, but Cloud is used as a marketing term. It was created as a marketing term -- and there is very little in terms of technical definition of what "cloud" should really be.

    And just in case -- no, CloudLinux is not a Cloud. I agree with that
    NIST released a definition of Cloud in October of 2009 which included the following statement:

    Note 1: Cloud computing is still an evolving paradigm. Its definitions, use cases, underlying technologies, issues, risks, and benefits will be refined in a spirited debate by the public and private sectors. These definitions, attributes, and characteristics will evolve and change over time.

    Rackspace, Amazon, and other large Cloud infrastructure's were built more or less as you stated and they are NOT per instance redundant across multiple servers, and/or locations. They are essentially a VPS provider. When the host server that goes down when you are on that server, so does the instance.

    Rackspace still to this day clearly states on their (new) website that servers are RAID10, and in the event of a host node failure the customers will go down in which they will try to resolve it in 3 hours or less. Their instances do not utilize centralized storage, and they are not redundant across multiple physical servers.

    The debate has been last year that the level of redundancy required is complete server independence. This has been discussed and is becoming the standard. Customers are now expecting this level of service and rightfully so. Every major Cloud platform vendor has this capability now, and they are all instructing their new partners and customers to utilize it.

    The standards will continue to evolve and single points of failure of an entire server, switch, or other traditional point of failure crashing will be eliminated in Cloud.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by CloudWeb View Post
    NIST released a definition of Cloud in October of 2009 which included the following statement:
    Hmm, based on this definition from NIST:
    http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SNS/clou...ud-def-v15.doc

    Shared hosting with CloudLinux is Cloud (I still don't agree with it, but I am going against well defined standard).
    Lets see the "Essential Characteristics":
    On-demand self-service. A consumer can unilaterally provision computing capabilities, such as server time and network storage, as needed automatically without requiring human interaction with each service’s provider.
    Well, that has been there since end of 90th. You can get shared hosting account via complete self-service process.
    Broad network access. Capabilities are available over the network and accessed through standard mechanisms that promote use by heterogeneous thin or thick client platforms (e.g., mobile phones, laptops, and PDAs).
    I guess no explanation needed -- hosting had it always
    Resource pooling. The provider’s computing resources are pooled to serve multiple consumers using a multi-tenant model, with different physical and virtual resources dynamically assigned and reassigned according to consumer demand. There is a sense of location independence in that the customer generally has no control or knowledge over the exact location of the provided resources but may be able to specify location at a higher level of abstraction (e.g., country, state, or datacenter). Examples of resources include storage, processing, memory, network bandwidth, and virtual machines.
    Multi-tenant model - check, resources: processing - check, memory -- check, network bandwidth -- check, virtual machines -- not with a single server, but it doesn't state that it has to include all resources

    Rapid elasticity. Capabilities can be rapidly and elastically provisioned, in some cases automatically, to quickly scale out and rapidly released to quickly scale in. To the consumer, the capabilities available for provisioning often appear to be unlimited and can be purchased in any quantity at any time.
    This can be done with LVE, you can scale a single customer by increasing limits, on the fly. And if you are on 16 core server -- the ability to scale is pretty huge. You are still bound by single server, but scalability doesn't have to be infinite.

    Measured Service. Cloud systems automatically control and optimize resource use by leveraging a metering capability at some level of abstraction appropriate to the type of service (e.g., storage, processing, bandwidth, and active user accounts). Resource usage can be monitored, controlled, and reported providing transparency for both the provider and consumer of the utilized service.
    Storage, bandwidth -- had been done for a long time. With CL -- you can also measure CPU (processing), connections and memory (in latest beta version).


    Lets see service models:
    Cloud Platform as a Service (PaaS). The capability provided to the consumer is to deploy onto the cloud infrastructure consumer-created or acquired applications created using programming languages and tools supported by the provider. The consumer does not manage or control the underlying cloud infrastructure including network, servers, operating systems, or storage, but has control over the deployed applications and possibly application hosting environment configurations.
    That works for shared hosting. Create PHP app, deploy it.


    Does it mean that CL on a dedicated server is a cloud? Fine, I think I would have to cave in, and accept that it does. It goes against my belief of what cloud is, but based on this definition, shared hosting with CL & dedicated server is a cloud.
    TBH: Based on this definition, pretty much any shared hosting is a cloud.
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    451
    Ahhhhhhh,

    I just now read this, and i know why this is a battle now...

    "CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable"

    Igor being the CEO of this company, and we are setting higher standards that he can achieve with this "OS that makes shared hosting stable"

    Its all coming Evident.. :-)
    Michael Wallace - michael@innoscale.net
    Innovative Scaling Technologies Inc. - A Cloud Service Provider
    24/7 Support, Call us @ 1-307-200-4880
    www.innoscale.net - Seattle, Silicon Valley, Dallas, Chicago, Washington D.C., and Europe

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by arisythila View Post
    Ahhhhhhh,

    I just now read this, and i know why this is a battle now...

    "CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable"

    Igor being the CEO of this company, and we are setting higher standards that he can achieve with this "OS that makes shared hosting stable"

    Its all coming Evident.. :-)
    Michael -- sorry I didn't realize you haven't seen my signature at the end of each message.
    I am sorry if I confused you or bored you. I thought we had meaningful conversation on what is cloud, and if CL can be considered a cloud when it runs on a single server (note, I don't think it can).
    Yet, if you think it is waste of your time, I apologize, and stop posting.
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    451
    Yes, but instead of argueing. You should take into heart what cloud hosters are currently doing.

    Also what kind of standards we have put into place.

    Thanks,

    EDIT: This way you can go back to the drawing board and make your product meet and exceed those standards.
    Last edited by arisythila; 01-26-2011 at 02:36 PM.
    Michael Wallace - michael@innoscale.net
    Innovative Scaling Technologies Inc. - A Cloud Service Provider
    24/7 Support, Call us @ 1-307-200-4880
    www.innoscale.net - Seattle, Silicon Valley, Dallas, Chicago, Washington D.C., and Europe

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    So, what is your idea of a cloud hosting?
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,030
    We're not all going and spending large sums of money to create a higher level of reliability because it's fun, it's because people are expecting this of Cloud. Redundant power supplies, RAID, and all of that is fine but servers still fail and they fail hard.

    Centralizing the storage, releasing an instance/vm from a single server, and other environmental flexibility is doing great great things for this business. I say embrace it with open arms as continuing to deny these benefits will only leave you behind.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    451
    When i think if cloud hosting, I think scalable, and high availability. If srv1 crashes, its got to provision and run on srv2.

    Im not saying a dedicated cannot be reliable, but just I think our main thing is having as few single points of failures as we can. Thats our main goal.
    Michael Wallace - michael@innoscale.net
    Innovative Scaling Technologies Inc. - A Cloud Service Provider
    24/7 Support, Call us @ 1-307-200-4880
    www.innoscale.net - Seattle, Silicon Valley, Dallas, Chicago, Washington D.C., and Europe

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    1. As of today, I see cloud often being less reliable then dedicated servers. I know it goes against what cloud is/its architecture and everything else, but due to complexity, human error, SAN issues, network issues, and 100s of other reasons -- I see that majority of cloud services are having issues. Often those issues spawn the whole cloud, and not just a single server. And this happens with major companies who know what they are doing. Rackspace, Amazon, name any cloud company -- I am sure they had major downtime.
    I am also a strong believer that as platform matures -- this will change, and cloud will become more reliable then dedicated servers.
    Last edited by iseletsk; 01-26-2011 at 03:40 PM.
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    451
    Last year we were able to achieve 100% uptime. Most of our multi tiered customers (clustered customers) that are running multiple in gateways, load balancers, and application servers noticed ZERO downtime last year.

    It was kind of funny, I had a server crash awhile back

    System Uptime : 373 days, 16 hours, 5 minutes
    Controller Uptime : 42 days, 7 hours, 21 minutes
    Last Server Failure Time: Sat Aug 28 08:43:22 2010 (srv2)

    So in this Grid, we had srv2 fail. Applogic, saw that it failed and it would not respond. So applogic logged into the IPMI powered down the srv, powered it back up, rebuilt the volumes, and it was back in good running state again...

    Mind you, We got ZERO calls about this server crashing. I didn't even know it happened until septermber when i did my rounds..
    Michael Wallace - michael@innoscale.net
    Innovative Scaling Technologies Inc. - A Cloud Service Provider
    24/7 Support, Call us @ 1-307-200-4880
    www.innoscale.net - Seattle, Silicon Valley, Dallas, Chicago, Washington D.C., and Europe

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by iseletsk View Post
    1. As of today, I see cloud often being less reliable then dedicated servers. I know it goes against what cloud is/its architecture and everything else, but due to complexity, human error, SAN issues, network issues, and 100s of other reasons -- I see that majority of cloud services are having issues. Often those issues spawn the whole cloud, and not just a single server. And this happens with major companies who know what they are doing. Rackspace, Amazon, name any cloud company -- I am sure they had major downtime.
    I am also a strong believer that as platform matures -- this will change, and cloud will become more reliable then dedicated servers.
    You have heard about major Cloud problems because it effects many customers, but you don't hear about the tens of thousands of servers crashing every day that are not in a Cloud because it only effects one server, or one application. There have been far fewer of these outages on superior technology with complete redundancies where even the failure of the Cloud engine results in no downtime of any running Cloud components.

    Fact. We have been in business for 13 years primarily operating as a Managed Hosting provider. We host many traditional infrastructures, still to this day we host more off the cloud than on the cloud.

    Fact. Of that business, these customers spend significantly more to create a high available environment than they would in Cloud.

    Fact. Those customers routinely have large scale and costly outages that require manual intervention of physical engineers and emergency engineers in the middle of the night to correct conditions.

    Fact. Our Cloud's have never gone down unless we wanted it to which is 1-2x/year for our major upgrades. During those time, the most stringent customers have multiple clouds so they remain 100% available as only one is done at a time.

    Fact. As Michael has stated, it is automatic when failures do occur. We have a failure two days ago in a Cloud. The Cloud sensed the failure, restarted all instances on another available server, started rebuilding the data streams, logged into the failed server via IPMI and rebooted it, and it came back up and cleared the data streams and started over as a fresh new server in the Cloud.

    Single points are failure are eliminated if the provider chooses to do so. There's no reason to see full Cloud outages if every component, including the engine, is redundant.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    USA / UK
    Posts
    4,577
    Quote Originally Posted by CloudWeb View Post
    You are welcome to your opinion, but Cloud is not a marketing term. It is much more defined and there are standards being set. Besides companies like Tier 1 Research and the 451 Group, the US Government, and even providers are continuing to properly define and establish the definition.

    Marketing terms are things like "compute cycles" and "overselling".
    Cloud is a marketing term plain and simple.

    Quote Originally Posted by arisythila View Post
    I also agree, There is what I believe to be a certian standard, sort of like PCI Compliance Standards, or SAS 70, or some of the others. To me there are a set of rules you must abid by to be a "cloud" hoster.

    1. Centralized Storage
    2. N+1 In the event a switch fails, do you have a hot standby?
    3. Automatic failover (WITHOUT HUMAN INTERVENTION)
    4. Scalability
    5. I think being able to do load balancing and stuff is pretty important, but I dont think this is a limiting factor.

    If you can obtain these sort of standards, Im sure there are a few things i've missed. But these are the basis.

    Marketing... LOL. I guess it depends on what kind of cloud your thinking of..
    That's a Cluster. Not a cloud really unless you define them to be the same.

    Cloud isn't anything new - they have been around since the 1950's as Clusters - some marketing people invented the Cloud word for the ignorant masses who find words like cluster and processor and such scary. Same thing happened with hacker vs cracker.

    A cloud supposedly means a high availability cluster - so why not call it that? marketing.....

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by CloudWeb View Post
    You have heard about major Cloud problems because it effects many customers, but you don't hear about the tens of thousands of servers crashing every day that are not in a Cloud because it only effects one server, or one application. There have been far fewer of these outages on superior technology with complete redundancies where even the failure of the Cloud engine results in no downtime of any running Cloud components.
    Care to quote source of your statistics?


    [quote]

    Fact. Those customers routinely have large scale and costly outages that require manual intervention of physical engineers and emergency engineers in the middle of the night to correct conditions.
    I can see that. They are not prepare to deal with complexities of running a cloud. Hosting provider is much better to deal with it.

    Fact. Our Cloud's have never gone down unless we wanted it to which is 1-2x/year for our major upgrades. During those time, the most stringent customers have multiple clouds so they remain 100% available as only one is done at a time.
    What about individual clients on your cloud? Do you want to say that no individual customer on your client didn't have downtime due to disk, network, or what ever other reason? If that is the case -- GREAT!
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Princeton
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by arisythila View Post
    Last year we were able to achieve 100% uptime. Most of our multi tiered customers (clustered customers) that are running multiple in gateways, load balancers, and application servers noticed ZERO downtime last year.

    It was kind of funny, I had a server crash awhile back

    System Uptime : 373 days, 16 hours, 5 minutes
    Controller Uptime : 42 days, 7 hours, 21 minutes
    Last Server Failure Time: Sat Aug 28 08:43:22 2010 (srv2)

    So in this Grid, we had srv2 fail. Applogic, saw that it failed and it would not respond. So applogic logged into the IPMI powered down the srv, powered it back up, rebuilt the volumes, and it was back in good running state again...

    Mind you, We got ZERO calls about this server crashing. I didn't even know it happened until septermber when i did my rounds..
    Congrats! Excellent statistics? Is that shared hosting server running in VM on applogic?
    Igor Seletskiy
    CEO @ Cloud Linux Inc
    http://www.cloudlinux.com
    CloudLinux -- The OS that can make your Shared Hosting stable

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-15-2010, 04:05 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-02-2010, 01:39 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-30-2010, 04:42 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-13-2010, 01:08 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-27-2010, 01:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •