Tenant Data Services Inc: Fill & Download for Free

Here you go Mohammed Saiful Alam Siddiquee (मुहम्मद सैफुल आलम सिद्दीकी).These should get you going:The Dark SideThe Daily ShowTrump Derangement SyndromeTeens in the Driver Seat (safety program)Tedious (internet slang)Tenancy Deposit Scheme (UK)Tokyo Disney Sea (amusement park)The Dispute Service (est. 2003; tenant disputes; UK)Tabular Data StreamTechnical Diagnostic Services (Fort Worth, TX)Technology Development Strategy (US DoD Joint Capabilities Integration Development System)Tripod Data SystemsTotal Debt Service (Ratio)Top Drive System (petroleum industry)Time Data Security (various locations)Thermal Desorption System (scientific equipment)The Downward Spiral (Nine Inch Nails album)Telephone & Data Systems, Inc.Total Dissolved SaltsThe Daydream SoundTransfer Disclosure Statement (Real Estate)Trojan Defence Suite (software)Temporary Data StorageTag Data StandardTexas Disposal SystemsThief: Deadly Shadows (video game)Time-Domain SpectroscopyTrial Defense ServiceTransdermal SystemTie Down System (device)Travel Distribution ServicesTotal Diet Survey (US FDA)Tactical Data SystemThe Drawing Studio (Arizona)Technical Development Services (various organizations)Top-Down Solutions (car parts)Teatro Del Sole (Italian: Theatre Of The Sun)Technical Documentation System (software)The Distribution Solution (UK)Telephone Directory Service (Australia)Time Delay SpectrometryTomsoft Diary System (software)Torque Data System (software)Time Date StampTime, Distance and Shielding (radiation exposure)Top-Down Shooter (gaming)Tetris DS (game)Temasek Design School (Singapore)Tuchenhagen Dairy Systems (various locations)Target Development SystemToyota Driving School (Japan)Transcript Delivery SystemTime Division SwitchingToronto Daily Star (Canada)Transputer Development SystemTalley Defense SystemsTransactions on Database SystemsThermal Desorption SpectrometryThe Democratic StrategistThiamine DisulfideTokyo Designers Space (Japan)Tonga Defense ServicesTraining and Development SolutionsTurmdeckelschneckenTerrestrial Digital ServiceTactical Defense SystemsTime Distribution SystemTarget Designation SystemThompson Dorfman SweatmanTotal Drug Spend (Medicare)Toutes Des Salopes (gaming clan)Trace-Driven SimulationTime Delay SwitchTransit Delay SelectionTest Development SeriesTactical Display SystemTotal Distribution SystemTer Die Sumendum (to be taken 3 times a day; prescription marking)Tubular Data StreamTeraherz Time Domain SpectroscopyTool and Die Systems (TDS Automation, Inc.)Training Development StudyTemporary Duty StationTactical Data StationTelephone and Data ServiceTridion DialogserverTemperature, Depth, SalinityTelecommunications & Data SystemsTelemetry Data StoreTagged Delimited String Format (IBM Websphere MQSeries SW)Technology Development SectionThrowDown Sports (forum)Training Decision SystemTrillium Digital Systems, Inc. (an Intel company)Time Delay Setting (electromechanical product feature)Terminal Display SystemTactical Digital SystemTemperature-Determined SexTerrestrial Data Service (WorldCom)TRADOC Documentation SystemTraining Device SystemTraining Development SectionTraining Development ServiceTest Description SheetTactical Development StudyTeam Death Strike (gaming)Transfer and Display SoftwareTraffic Data Studies System (Sprint)Transient Diffusion-SubliminationTape Duplication SystemTemporal Data SystemTechnology Direction Statement (Sprint)Technical Documentation SetTime Demand Satisfied (real-time scheduling)Travel Design Studio (travel agent; Bergamo, Italy)Total Distance SeparationTest and Diagnostic ServiceTechnique Développement Services (French: Technical Development Services; France)

Probably both, and neither. The space is young, and there are a lot of options evolving on a division of responsibilities, or alternative approaches. The challenge for a consumer is that each of these tools evolved simultaneously and independently, with some convergence occurring now as the market matures towards a fit on what it wants and the backing businesses look for revenue to stay afloat. It is a fast evolving and moving space.Hopefully this post describes a lens of the various layers of responsibility that exist in 2017, and the different ways one might consume them, and how they might evolve.tl;dr, what’s the abstraction you want to provide your developers? There are currently 6 in the industry:1. Bare metal machines (PXE)2. Workload jobs/tasks (HPC clouds)3. VMs (elastic compute clouds)4. Containers (container schedulers & runtimes)5. Applications or Microservices (cloud native platforms)6. Functions (serverless clouds)Most data centres will have a mix of these depending on their specific needs.Let’s explore these in detail. From the bottom up:1. Infrastructure Controllers. Where do the containers run in this new data center? We have competing visions here of bare metal PXE booting with something like pxelinux, kickstart, cobbler, Crowbar, OpenStack Ironic, or RackHD, vs. VMs on infrastructure clouds (IaaS) by the usual suspects (AWS, GCE, Azure, vSphere, OpenStack, VMware Photon Controller).2. Container Formats and Runtimes. While Docker is the defacto container image format, though there's also CoreOS' App Container Image (ACI). Runtime-wise, most have agreed to Open Container Initiative's runC as the low-level CLI+library to run containers. Docker uses this around a daemon called containerd. Higher level runtimes include Docker engine, the appC family led by CoreOS rkt , and Cloud Foundry's Garden which supports a mix of Droplets, Docker images, and Windows containers. Microsoft themselves are shipping Windows containers in Windows 2016, based in part on Docker technology.3. Container OSes and Hypervisors. The pioneers here were CoreOS, now there's also rancherVM, Photon Machine, and vSphere Integrated Containers, all of which enable hardware level VM isolation at the container level. There's signs Microsoft will do this with HyperV as well. Will the future really be Linux kernels on bare metal? Stay tuned.4. Infrastructure/Config Managers. All this infrastructure has servers/networks/storage to be managed and configured, with containers on top. This is far from a solved problem. The next-generation here includes the Hashicorp ecosystem (Vagrant, Terraform, Consul, etc.) which compose very nicely. Cloud Foundry's BOSH also does well here across multi clouds and infrastructure controllers with a unique packaging, compilation, disposable VM, and release management philosophy. Docker Machine is also evolving in this space. Of course there's also the usual suspects of Puppet, Chef, RedHat Ansible, and/or SaltStack, along with proprietary breeathren from BMC (Bladelogic and RLM), CA (App Deployment Automation), and IBM (UrbanCode)5. Scheduler Frameworks. Let's run some actual workloads now, shall we? Let's say we have a few different kinds of uniform workloads (batch, database, filesystems, etc.) we need to run on a fleet of servers. These workloads might or might not be in containers, and they might not consist of replicated services that require traditional stateless scale-out. In particular, they might be stateful services like filesystems & databases, and thus few assumptions can be made about them. How do I deploy and manage the lifecycle (start/stop) of those? The main game in town here is Apache Mesos / Mesosphere DCOS, though there's also Hadoop's YARN. The key point is that you have to build your own application scheduler to use the framework, i.e. Hadoop has one, Spark another, Cassandra another, etc. If you want generic scale-out workloads, you’ll actually want to skip down to Cointainer Scheduler (#7 below), and consider the Mesos native one, called Marathon .This layer is an area of hot debate in the industry as to whether these scheduler frameworks are the new foundation of everything, the "Data Center Operating System" in Mesosphere marketing speak, or more of an optional/niche thing for large fleets of uniform workloads like a Hadoop cluster or Spark cluster or a big website like Twitter or Google. CoreOS for example, seems to advocate, "all you need is #1, 2, 3, 4, and 6, then run Tectonic (Kubernetes) as #7"! Mesos is sort of the leader of the "revenge of the HPC cluster" movement that Google or Apple's Siri represents, which makes bare metal cool again, and virtualization less of a necessity.So, in summary, Mesos becomes a no-brainer when you want to rely on bare metal and don't want to have to re-PXE the machines to swap workloads. Another way to look at this, is, Mesos' allure really depends on how good your infrastructure orchestrator (#4) is. If you really hate config management and provisioning, and want to minimize their use, Mesos gets interesting. If you love your infrastructure orchestrator, like you dream about the awesomeness of your Chef recipes, or love watching BOSH analyze its way to an automated deployment plan, Mesos is less interesting. Keep in mind though, that only the commerical DC/OS really has decent packaging/configuration on its own, the open source release will require you to bring your own.6. Basic Job Scheduler / Container Managers. Phew! Finally we are working with containers. So, what if I don't want to run a uniform workload, I just want to manage a mixed workload of few containers weaved together? This is where Docker Compose, CoreOS Fleet, Mesos Chronos, or systemd-nspawn come in. The point here is to manage simple or custom process and/or container lifecycles on several machines as opposed to the more uniform "scale out" container lifecycles of a container scheduler below.7. Container Schedulers. The more common case, where lots of attention in the industry is focused is to manage a zoo of load balanced, scale-out, recoverable service workloads inside containers, with the ability to attach storage or networking, or other services as appropriate. This is what Kubernetes or Cloud Foundry's Diego do well, along with upstarts like Hashicorp Nomad, Docker Swarm, or Mesosphere's Marathon. It's almost impossible to throw a rock in the air without hitting 2 or 3 container schedulers on the way down these days.8. Container Management Consoles. Need a GUI to manage #6 and/or 7 at a technical low-level? This is the space that Shipyard, Docker's Universal Control Plane, and Tutum come in.9. Container Packagers, Stagers, and Registries. Using containers requires us to build, maintain, store and distribute them. It's not as simple as "Dockerfile & go" when you have multiple layers and teams. Most schedulers above require some kind of Docker-compatible Registry, though Cloud Foundry's comes with its own VM and container blobstore to complement Docker. Hashicorp's Packer helps to repeatably create VMs and containers, as do Cloud Foundry's Buildpacks or OpenShift's S2I. CoreOS' Quay is an alternative Docker container builder and registry that competes with Docker's Trusted Registry, though the latter is available for download, not just a cloud offering. Concourse CI is a container-centric continuous integration/delivery system that is also great at weaving together containers for build tasks.10. Container Volume Managers. This is a work in progress for many containers systems that isn't quite prime time, but will be essential probably by 2017. The point is to enable recoverable, dynamically scheduled persistent volumes on containers so that stateful scale out container workloads might be possible. Traditional Docker volumes are bound to a single host, i.e. containers that need volumes live or die with the host; they can't be moved without their volumes unless you are willing to lose data.Volumes that can migrate as fast and seamlessly as containers across hosts is a hard challenge to get right within and across clusters at scale. Most don't try. Traditional scale-out workloads focus on stateless services, and punt the state management to a different layer such as a scale-out NoSQL database (BigTable, HBase, Cassandra, Riak, Geode/GemFire, etc.), clustered filesystem (e.g. Ceph or GlusterFS) , or a traditional Infrastructure/Config manager approach. This requires consistent scheduling on the part of the container scheduler, e.g. Kubernetes Stateful Sets. Today, Kubernetes has a pluggable approach to managed volumes, as does Docker with its volume drivers. Cloud Foundry Diego’s persistent volumes drivers use a combination of the Open Service Broker API to provision the volume itself and the Docker volume driver API to manage the volume lifecycle with its containers.11. Container Virtual Networking. Also a work in progress, but more mature than storage, this layer is what allows containers to pretend they have a private network, by using VXLAN, GRE encapsulation or other proprietary means to tunnel a logical network over UDP or to build a full peering network with BGP. The Docker ecosystem has been early to market here with several overlay including Weaveworks Net, Scope, and Flux, Docker Network itself from their Socketplane acquisition, CoreOS flannel, OpenvSwitch, etc. whereas Calico does this without overlays via creative use of IPTables and BGP route reflection. VMware has the current leader and most mature offering of the space here, with NSX, which will be container-integrated soon. These solutions are all needed by the OpenStack community too, so there's a often overlap to support both , though some (e.g. Weave) are Docker-centric. OpenShift uses Open vSwitch for its Kubernetes overlay. Cloud Foundry uses Flannel by default in its container networking (c2c) technology, though a VMware NSX plugin is coming in 2017.From the experience with OpenStack Neutron or early VMware NSX adopters, it's fair to say that this layer is not for the faint of heart ; a lot of uncertainty remains around performance, security, and scalability. Many container systems can operate just fine without this, though clearly the developer's life is easier if this "just works".12. Containers as a Service / Container Platform. At this point of the layer cake, we should consider the product agglomerations at this level. Docker, Inc. for example draws a line and calls everything below here “Containers as a Service”, or CaaS, and this model is the basis of their Docker Datacenter offering, which adds extra hooks for security (RBAC, LDAP, etc.) to a bundle of Docker Engine, Trusted Registry, and Universal Control Plane. Rancher also provides a very interesting offering here by providing a unified GUI/catalog/control plane for any one of Mesos (+ Marathon), Docker Swarm, or Kubernetes on the infrastructure cloud controller of your choice. Hashicorp also provides Atlas which is a combination of their various ecosystem tools below this line. Mesosphere commerically are calling their Mesos-based product DC/OS which is a value-added Mesos + Marathon with package installers, software distribution, operations/network/storage services, and a GUI.Amazon EC2 Container Service, Google Container Engine, and Microsoft Azure Container Service are the big rentable services here that are a mix of proprietary and open (i.e. Docker or Kubernetes compatible) bits. Cloud Foundry itself (from IBM as Bluemix, Pivotal, SAP, Huawei, Swisscom, Centurylink, and others) also operates at this level with Docker support.There’s an interesting market debate going on here. Vendors that position their primary commercial offerings at this layer are marketing that this is the optimal level of abstraction for the next generation data center. It presumes containers (or variants such as “pods”) as the unit of management. This is lower level than the traditional Platform as a Service (PaaS) cloud focus on the “app” or “service” as the unit of management.The main argument these vendors have against PaaS is that it is too restrictive for real world scenarios such as legacy systems. See #14 for a counterpoint.13. Cloud Native Services and Frameworks. Containers aren't all that interesting unless you can take advantage of their benefits for big gains (higher density, faster provision/deploy of software, disposable/immutable server management). While Google proved out the potential of containers most people are adopting containers for more swiftly deployed scalable software, both Netflix and Amazon illustrate it's totally possible to work faster, and scale more, with just VMs. Containers are nice, but they're not enough.Patterns for Microservices become essential here. Pivotal’s Spring Boot and Spring Cloud have become a very popular way of building Java-based, cloud native microservices with very little effort. Alternatives include .NET Core (Web API), Python (Flask, Django), Ruby (Sinatra or Rails), JavaScript (Node with express), Scala (with Akka), and Golang as popular microservices languages + frameworks.Facilities such as service discovery, dynamic configuration, circuit breaking are very useful, from NetflixOSS Eureka, Archaius, or Hystrix+Turbine respectively, or Hashicorp’s Consul, for example. There are tools for scale-out data, such as Apache Kafka for stream buffering, Apache Flink or Spring Cloud Data Flow for stream processing (which deploys on almost any container scheduler). Also consider NoSQL solutions like Cassandra, HBase, Riak for regional active-active data replication with eventual consistency, or Big Data solutions like Hadoop, Spark, etc.Cloud Foundry players such as Bluemix and the Pivotal Network have a rich set of offerings in this layer based on their Open Broker API, either as on demand services as with Bluemix (IBM Watson being popular), or as downloadable BOSH releases that can be installed anywhere (via Github or the Pivotal Network).Of course, AWS, Google, and Microsoft arguably have the broadest set of options, many of which are proprietary rebrandings of a mix of open source and proprietary code, offered as a service. They have the benefit of hiding all the muck in the lower layers.14. Cloud Native Application Platforms. This all seems really complicated! Add all of this up and some may want an "all in one" solution that simplifies and structures the automation layers together, plus provides more architecture & programmatic tooling, performance monitoring, multi-tenant security, developer-oriented UIs, etc. to build cloud native apps and microservices beyond just "lift and shifting" a legacy for minor benefit.A cloud native platform gives a developer two experiences: a place to deploy application code, and consume services. More specifically, they can push their application code to the cloud at scale, securely, with high availability, and without worrying much about the deep technology underneath. Secondly, they can request on demand services/utilities and bind those to their code, such as databases, message queues, caches, middleware, security systems, etc.This layer would have been called Platform as a Service (PaaS) through 2014, but that’s a misnomer: this software is not always “as a service”, it can be installed anywhere. The traditional offerings here are Google App Engine, Force.com, and Heroku. But this layer has evolve beyond these relatively opaque platforms into simply a tailored combination of all the other technologies mentioned in this post! Think of a cloud native platform as having more opinions about how developers should build their apps via Cloud Native Services/Frameworks and pre-integrated use of other technologies , whereas Container Platforms (#12) really don’t care and thus strive to be broad based replacements for the traditional VM-based datacenter. Both can run legacy workloads to varying degrees of success, since they're all mostly based on the same technology. The difference is in user experience and focus/maturity of various features in the stack. Whether either is preferable depends on your goals and objectives.After Heroku’s use of containers, Cloud Foundry (including Pivotal Cloud Foundry, and IBM BlueMix) was the fast follower here, using containers back to 2012. Pivotal is now commercializing NetflixOSS and covers most of these bases all the way down to the infrastructure, though its individual open source modules aren't used broadly outside of the CF ecosystem. Another new alternative is Red Hat's OpenShift v3 in combination with Red Hat's recent acquisition of Ansible. OpenShift v3 is aiming to compose Kubernetes, RedHat JBoss/Wildfly, and RedHat Enterprise Linux, into a semi-structured platform. It’s less opinionated than Cloud Foundry, but more opinionated than a typical container platform.15. Serverless Platforms. The next logical step from having a place to push application code and consume services, is a place to push functions that might be reusable, and not even worry about things like instances or containers at all. Some call this Functions as a Service (FaaS). This layer is the new buzzword in the IT industry, with container vendors jumping over cloud native platforms into the “serverless buzz”. AWS Lambda is the primary offering in this space today, but Google Cloud Functions, Azure Cloud Functions, are also out. Serverless frameworks for Docker , Kubernetes , and Cloud Foundry are sprouting up. Watch this space.16. Vendors, Foundations, Open Source Collaboration & Competiton. Many projects discussed here are one ofa) open source offerings available via some Open Source Foundation (e.g. Apache), orb) directly as commercial open source via venture-backed startups (i.e. Docker, Inc. or CoreOS, Inc.), or in some cases, larger software vendors (i.e. VMware), orc) proprietary offerings available via cloud service providers that might be based on open source (e.g. Google’s Container Engine is based on Kubernetes), or may be proprietary variants that free ride (ahem, repackage) open source or even repackage proprietary software as a service (both are popular with AWS).This is getting to be a very competitive and noisy marketplace because all of these solutions, as mentioned above, evolved simultaneously and independently. It’s unclear which vendors will survive this competitive landscape, though I would assume most major ones will be funded through 2020.If I were to make a bet, barring a major backlash or scandal, Amazon Web Services is poised to take a large portion of the future of the data center architecture, and all of these layers are going to be a moot point. Azure and Google will round out #2 and #3 positions, with everyone else fighting for scraps. All these open source frameworks and options are arguably just too much complexity - we’re spoiled for choice. At best, they’ll be acquisition targets for these three behemoths.That said, this isn’t a fait accompli… this industry has ceded control lock-in to a single vendor for decades at a time in the past, and it doesn’t usually turn out well. Open cloud technology remains a valid counterweight against proprietary clouds.Given this competition and a desire to avoid lock-in, some projects have the backing of a non-profit organization to ensure independent governance and stewardship, with the main two foundations being the Cloud Native Container Foundation (CNCF) and the Cloud Foundry Foundation (CFF) in this structured platform space, along with the Apache Foundation for major components. The CNCF is adopting the ownership and stewardship of several projects, starting with Kubernetes (from Google), Open Tracing (from several devs at Pivotal, Soundcloud, Twitter, etc.), and Prometheus (from Soundcloud) into an open ecosystem. The CFF owns all the Cloud Foundry code and is focused on certifying vendor products that use the open source kernel of Cloud Foundry, governing commit rights among members, and training developers cloud native techniques. Both foundations are sub-projects of the Linux Foundation, so rather than pure competitors, these foundations likely will become an overlapping set of technologies utilized for very different focal goals: the CNCF’s charter is broadly to drive the adoption and evolution of container and microservice technologies, whereas Cloud Foundry’s mission is to accelerate business innovation through broadly-defined open cloud software. Already we’re seeing collaboration (e.g. a cross-foundation working group for adopting CF Service Brokers as a standard).

With so many vacation rental websites out there today, it can be difficult to figure out the best place to list your property. Conducting a quick Google search will result in a variety of specialty websites such as:The Apartment Service (www.theapartmentservice.com)At Home Abroad, Inc. (www.athomeabroadinc.com)Great Rentals (www.greatrentals.com)Holiday Lettings (www.holidayletting.co.uk)Online Vacation Rentals (www.onlinevacationrentals)Rentalo (www.rentalo.com)Sea2Sky Vacation Rentals (www.sea2skyvacationrentals.com)Vacation Home Rentals (www.vacationhomerentals.comVillas International (www.villasitnl.com)It is not uncommon to see property managers listing their properties across ten or more of these outlets. But times are changing, and a consolidation of the bigger sites has created five main players.Airbnb [www.airbnb.com]FlipKey [www.flipkey.com]HomeAway [www.homeaway.com]VacationRentals. [www.vacationrentals.com]VRBO [www.vrbo.com]A Cost ComparisonThe revenue model for vacation rental websites had been the same for the 15 years before Airbnb arrived. Property owners (hosts) would buy annual subscriptions to several individual vacation rental websites. Serious hosts would pay for “upgraded” listings to improve their visibility by highlighting their ad at the top of the search results. These premium listings promise up to “4x more booking” for a hefty fee.For example, a basic listing with HomeAway is $349, but a premier listing goes for nearly $1,000. These traditional websites all employ the same tactics to upsell their users. Get people to sign up for a basic listing and then blame their lack of success on the lack of investment in their ad.Airbnb entered the market and saw a way to grab market share by charging nothing up front and taking fees only when bookings were confirmed.Here’s a quick comparison of the fee structures for the five largest sites.HomeAway responded to the threat of Airbnb by offering a pay-per-booking option. The fee is 10% of each booking, which is cheaper than Airbnb overall, but you can expect to have your listing buried under the hundreds of other premium-paying subscribers in your city.Seeing the success of Airbnb, FlipKey (by TripAdvisor) also entered with a similar pay-per-booking option to try to get in on the action. FlipKey has a great user interface and strong financial backing, but they continue to struggle gain new members.Traditional Fixed Fees vs. Per Booking PricingLet’s take $500 as the average price of a reasonably well-positioned listing on HomeAway or VRBO. It is interesting to see where the break-even point is between a $500 fixed-fee listing and an Airbnb pay-per-booking fee of 3%.The graph shows that if you are expecting to earn less than $15,000 dollars per year on your vacation rental then Airbnb looks like an obvious choice.But, remember, that Airbnb is charging fees to the host AND the guest. It is important to look at the total cost of rental from the customer’s perspective. Guest fees range from 6% (for more expensive stays) to 12% (for cheaper stays). Let’s take 8% as the fee the average guest incurs and again see what the break-even point is when taking all of the service fees into account.Over the course of a year these fees become substantial. Listing your place with Airbnb will cost more if you are expecting as little as $5,000 in bookings, and will cost you an additional $1,000 for every $12,000 in booking you receive throughout the year.So… why would I list my properties with Airbnb when I’m expecting over $150,000 in bookings this year!!??In one word: FREEDOMI spend an average of 2-hours per week managing each apartment. Airbnb allows me to leverage my time so effectively that I am now netting over $400 per hour. Airbnb is not competing on price, it is competing on VALUE.Unlike a traditional vacation home rental market where owners were looking to have longer term stays with relatively few well-screened guests. Airbnb has switched the paradigm by creating a less restrictive, more dynamic marketplace. By handling transactions, allowing for instant bookings, and streamlining the reservation process, the website allows for a higher volume of bookings for an ever- increasing variety of accommodations.With all this being said, it is important to note that Airbnb is not the right option for everyone.For instance, HomeAway or VRBO might be better primary options for you if you are planning to:· Rent a high value home (over $500 a night)· Rent to long-term tenants (over a month)I do recommend that if you use VRBO or HomeAway for longer stays, that you complement it with an Airbnb listing to help book the gaps in-between longer stays.Check out my website http://rentingyourplace.com for more info and check out Airdna - Airbnb Data and Analyticsa to see how airbnb properties are performing in over 4,000 cities worldwide.