Apoc

I have sent them a message almost immediately after you posted this, but haven't heard back yet. Hoping to hear from them soon. Do you maybe have a feature overview (so I can consider whether it's worth waiting for their response, rather than getting something developed myself)?

Yeah I'll be contacting the people who are responding in this thread. It would be good if some more people can participate. For now, perhaps you can do a cost calculation based on the features mentioned by bady (as well as any features like registering nameservers and other typical domain registrar features). If you need any other details in order to calculate the costs, I can provide those. In the meanwhile, the main thing I need is the old (existing) InternetX module - so if anyone can help out with that, that would be very helpful.

I am also looking for a module to integrate InternetX (with as much domain functionality as possible) into WHMCS. If anyone else is interested in getting this developed, I would be happy to share the costs. If so, please send me a PM. Additionally, I am looking for something else: For the existing InternetX addon (which is now not being sold anymore), I already have a paid activation code (license). However, I don't have the actual module itself. As such, if someone else has the code of the module, and could share it with me, I would be very grateful (and I would also be willing to pay you for your effort to help me out). As such, if you're reading this and you have this module, PLEASE contact me. Thank you.

While that's true, how is that relevant? This is WHMCS's forum, not a "let's push WHMCS clients to Hostbill" forum. Also - as indicated, Hostbill has issues of their own. Their functionality may be more advanced, but that's not of much use when something's not working and there's no (quick/proper) support to back you up.

Yeah, definitely. 1k to automate the core of your business is nothing. If you consider that expensive while your core business is hosting, maybe you should reconsider whether you should be in business at all (no disrespect intended - just sharing my point of view). You can't compare WHMCS/Hostbill with OnApp. They're completely different products. On top of that, you can't compare WHMCS/Hostbill support to OnApp's near-instant responses. I consider WHMCS to be _very_ underpriced. I'd really like to see them offer something like a premium package and would have no problem paying $xx,xxx if it does everything we need it to do, combined with good support. As long as it's not a model which is going to take a part of our revenue like Ubersmith does. We have also been considering to switch to Hostbill. But all the horror stories about bugs, coupled with (apparently) dramatically poor support, have been keeping us away. Anyway, back on-topic: we are actively working with OnApp, and we are trying to get the original blueprints/workflow from the developers of the current integration, in order to evaluate what would need to be fixed/added to get this integration in proper shape. I know the existing integration is open-source, so we could just evaluate this ourselves. But getting the dev documentation would obviously save quite a bit of time. We're currently still at the orientation stage, but we do consider it likely that we'll be picking up the development of this integration and get it in shape. If anyone's interested in either contributing to the development, or to chip in, drop me a line.

Right. You just lost yourself a sale. Sure, it's not-done for others to promote their own mods in this topic. But if you're going to be swearing in public (can it get any more unprofessional?), there's no way we're going to do business. It also makes Taylor's review sound very plausible. So you are first going to hijack some else's topic, and then also fail to deliver? No sale for you either.

Now I'm getting: --- License Noconnection WHMCS has not been able to verify your license for the past 7 days or more. Before you can access your WHMCS Admin Area again your license needs to be verified. Make sure you do not have a firewall blocking the connection to our server If you need assistance, email licensing@whmcs.com. --

Not sure if this is related, but I'm suddenly getting: --- Your license key <cut> is invalid. Possible reasons for this include: An incorrect license key has been used The IP Address your system is using has changed The domain you are using has changed The directory you are using has changed --- Nothing changed on our end whatsoever, so it seems WHMCS is having issues with their licensing system.

I'm not aware of any such functionality. It does have a "View printable version" link at the bottom, but no functionality to save it as a (pdf) file. Also: 1. The links to the invoices are pointing towards the admin panel, so this is not really usable for sending to a client 2. In the description field, for transactions it should also list the transaction ID 3. It should also be possible to let clients generate their own statements directly from the client panel Matt - could you comment on all this please?

In that case it won't be of much use in the near future IPv6 should definitely be part of a mod like this.

Bill, The voltage is irrelevant. You would only measure the amount of Watts that a port uses, and as such the input Voltage is irrelevant (as the amount of Watts are always the same, regardless of the Voltage). Also: we already have an Ipoman setup for testing purposes (Thomas set this up a couple of days ago), and we can give you access to it, so you wouldn't have to purchase one yourself. Furthermore: we have worked out in detail how the calculation should be done, and I can send this to you, if you'd like. If so, please let me know and I'll send you the specifics by email. Lastly: any news on the VM's? I would still like to be included with your beta tests if possible, so I can test whether what I have in mind works properly. I can then also give you useful feedback on that. Andre

I understand that this may not be needed for you, but keep in mind that when releasing a commercial module, the needs of the licencees are also very important. I can assure you that there's a huge demand for this (particularly with cheap VM's with low profit margins. Of course you can just turn off the VPS when it reaches its bandwidth limit, but that seems a bit harsh - we could never do that with our clients - but then again our VM's are much more expensive). As for tell the mod where to look for the stats: exactly the same way as with dedicated servers. Each graph represents 1 VM. If you'd ask me, in your script, no modifications should be necessary at all. However, then again I haven't seen the exact functionality. Perhaps you could add me in as a beta tester so I can check this out?

It is my understanding that it grabs the stats from Cacti, it only uses telnet for disabling ports and things like that. Right? If so, if you simply wouldn't use the telnet part for the VM's, then it should be able to use the Cacti graphs for VM's. For the script that should make no difference, if the graphs of the VM's are formatted the same as the graphs of dedicated servers. You could basically consider the host server a "switch", and each VM a "dedicated server". If you would for example have a host server with 24 VM's, you could basically make it look like a switch with 24 servers in cacti. I don't really see why that wouldn't work

Ok thanks! For me it would also be a major bummer if that wouldn't be possible. My reasoning for saying this should be possible, is based on the idea that the source of the data should be irrelevant, as long as the data is formatted the same way in Cacti

Why not? If he can put the graphs the same way in Cacti, that should work all the same right?

Hi Bill, This is good news - really can't wait to get it started. One request though; I sent you an email with the request whether you could also include power monitoring (which would also simply grab kWh values from Cacti graphs). This is intended to charge colocation clients for their power usage. There is practically no additional work involved for you, as it works exactly the same as monitoring bandwidth (except that some features would be left out). It would just pull the data from Cacti, and the only differences would be that for example it wouldn't need to work with overages (as there's no such thing for power - it would just bill the client for whatever amount of kWH they use multiplied by a number of cents). You have already been in contacting with Thomas about this, and I followed up on that email too (unfortunately I didn't hear back from you though), and there are a number of other people who are desperately waiting for the ability to charge for power usage. As such, it would be greatly appreciated if you could include this, as we believe this is hardly any additonal work for you.

Any news on this?

Stop complaining about the costs: 1. Quality is something you pay for 2. It can save you a lot of money (compared to doing all of it manually, or compared to not billing for overages because you missed them) 3. If you think it's not worth it, build it yourself and don't complain. 4. If you'd ask me, this module isn't overpriced, WHMcs is underpriced If you are having difficulties paying 40/mo for a module like this, then you should probably question yourself whether you should stay in business in the first place.

I've been working on this all day. Kayako is saying to just remove the code for support tickets from clientareahome.tpl and to basically not use that page for support tickets. WHMcs is saying to just edit the template yourself. However, I tried that by simply copying the code from supportticketslist.tpl to clientareahome.tpl - and that simply doesn't work. It looks like the relevant variables don't work there, and I think that has to do with the fact that these variables are probably defined in supporttickets.php (which is encoded) and not in clientarea.php. Since all of that is encoded I can't check that - but I don't think that there's a way around that really. If I find anything I'll post it here.

I'm having the exact same issue. I also followed the exact steps as set forth by Erik, but no luck. This is a very urgent issue for me, would really appreciate if someone can help out. Will pay for help.

A good solution for that would be if Matt would certify the 3rd party modules. The developer could then show the unencrypted version to Matt, and provide encrypted versions to end-users.

Why'd you spend $14k on something like that? Seems to me there are much cheaper alternatives out there that can do the same trick - or did I miss some specific unique features?