In the aughts (2000s) I rented a "managed" VPS that was based on FreeBSD jails and an overlay filesystem. It was great in that you didn't have to maintain most of the software yourself (e.g. security updates) because it was maintained by the hoster on the base filesystem layer, while at the same time you were still root on your own filesystem overlay, where you could add or modify any file from the base filesystem. If you messed up somehow, you could simply revert to the base filesystem version of the respective files. Furthermore only the files on your overlay counted against your filesystem quota. Unfortunately the hoster discontinued that offering after a couple of years.
> Unfortunately the hoster discontinued that offering after a couple of years.
I’m planning on starting a FreeBSD based hosting service, but I am not sure if anyone actually wants what I have in mind.
The thing is that I have some couple of very specific ideas in mind.
I will offer a small amount of storage, and not general internet connectivity.
Users will have 25GB space and the idea is that they will be able to connect over Wireguard, but they cannot make outbound connections from the host.
It’ll be like a /home/user in the cloud.
So you can keep some files there and connect from wherever in the world and use the cli tools we all know and love. But idk if there is an actual market for that or not.
The selling point is that I will be focusing on the storage of that data. ZFS with redundancy and offsite backups – the works. That’s why the amount of data should be low. Only keep the most important files there.
Also I’m gonna accept payments in Bitcoin only, and people will have to sign up for many years upfront.
I think maybe the number of people that want this can be counted on one hand heh
One question you may want to answer is why anyone would use your solution vs something like rsync.net or a small VM in DigitalOcean, etc. You said the selling point would be storage. What would be the differentiator in that area? Would price be it?
Just trying to help with question to validate the idea. Best of luck.
My impression of rsync.net is that it is for backup. Whereas my service would be a live service you ssh into. Basically, connect to Wireguard VPN and then ssh into your cloud home.
The idea being that this is where you keep, and interact with, your files that are important.
> DigitalOcean
My service would have less system administration for the user, and high level of storage redundancy and offsite backups
> Just trying to help with question to validate the idea. Best of luck.
