Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 7 Extended Life Cycle Support (ELS)

I mainly work on-premises with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). I focus my work on disconnected clusters, following that deployment model.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) helps mitigate downtime and lower risk. When we raise a support case, there is a priority-wise system. If there is any production issue, we can designate it as severity one, and Red Hat provides on-call support at that time. Red Hat is very good for support.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) provides excellent back-end support, which is one of the main features. The commands and overall functionality are more feasible compared to other Linux systems.

I assess the knowledge base offered by Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) as perfect. Red Hat is increasing in the market every day, and based on that, I find Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) more preferable.

The most important security feature in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is the constant support they provide. If any issue arises, we can recover from it through their back-end support.

I have tried Red Hat Insights, which now integrates with AI. However, the cluster I work on is mainly disconnected, so I use the AI feature less. For a personal knowledge base, we use the Insights component. Red Hat provides an excellent knowledge base with officially good documentation, which makes it more feasible to follow. I have previously worked on SUSE Linux as well, and I find Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) superior in comparison.

Regarding Image Builder, I work with it at a cluster level, configuring aspects such as ports and other settings.

I find it helpful and most preferable. I am committing to Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) going forward. Through my work experience, I have found it more feasible career-wise and learning-wise, with excellent opportunities to develop and explore more expertise. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has a very good scope.

At the connectivity level, there are some challenges I have faced. Currently, I am troubleshooting a cluster where etcd quorum issues have become loose. When etcd quorum loses stability, I need the kube-admin password and related information. At that time, I do not find feasible solutions for recovering that main resource. In such situations, I need to connect with Red Hat support. As an individual contributor, it is not ideal, as I need a more specialized person to resolve these doubts and issues.

Regarding agentic AI, I want more exploration into how AI integrates with these systems and how agentic AI tools such as Claude and other emerging systems will develop. For feasibility purposes, Red Hat should integrate these technologies with security considerations to ensure that agentic AI systems do not compromise security.

I want to see improvements in how agents and LLM models are building and evolving. There should be integration to ensure that LLM models do not replace our roles.

I have been working with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for six years.

I rate their technical support at eight out of ten, between eight to nine.

The initial setup was straightforward. They could directly connect if they wanted any connection with the team.

Regarding the pricing of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), we work with the client and received feedback that it is more reasonable. Currently, we are working with Red Hat Virtualization and comparing it with VMware. Many organizations are migrating from VMware to Red Hat Virtualization.

This is why I consider Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) more preferable, as it is also less costly. Red Hat is gaining more market power everywhere.

I rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) eight to nine overall.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is used primarily from a server perspective, running numerous applications on top of the Enterprise Linux server. This includes in-house applications, client-based applications, and integrations with Active Directory, LDAP, and databases that sit outside but are integrated with the Enterprise Linux servers. Over 8000 Linux machines are running across VMware, physical servers, and AWS instances.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) operates in a complete hybrid environment with machines running on physical servers, VMware, and Azure instances. Red Hat OpenShift serves as the private cloud product and runs on production and QA environments with a 32-node cluster and a 16-node cluster containing 16 worker nodes running Red Hat CoreOS, which is a customized operating system provided by Red Hat.

My experience is primarily on the Red Hat side, though I also work with multiple integrations including Active Directory, LDAP, Grafana, Dynatrace, and Prometheus. I use DataDog and Dynatrace for log monitoring. I currently work with several cloud platforms including GCP, AWS, Azure, and IBM, running Enterprise Linux and OpenShift on IBM cloud, Azure, and AWS where they offer managed services such as Red Hat OpenShift on AWS (ROSA) and Azure Red Hat OpenShift (ARO).

Compared to other technologies and products, I have not identified any cons for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), but I see many advantages. By using Red Hat OpenShift, resource consumption has been reduced significantly compared to what was consumed on Red Hat Enterprise Linux servers. Previously, a few applications ran on one RHEL server, but after moving to OpenShift, those applications were containerized and now run as containers on the OpenShift environment, reducing resource consumption by more than 80%.

Regarding time-saving aspects, using the Ansible configuration management automation tool saves considerable time. It allows me to automate multiple repetitive tasks instead of deploying everything manually, which can be quite repetitive.

To mitigate downtime and lower risks, changes are made during off-business hours to minimize business impact, often working during weekends or outside business hours. New upgrades are tested first in development and QA environments before being applied to production after receiving feedback.

Over more than a decade, I have found many improvements in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), especially in the last 10 years. Red Hat enterprise services continually introduce new features such as Broadcom host cover for VMware. Red Hat recently introduced OpenShift migration, allowing existing servers to be migrated from VMware or elsewhere directly to the Red Hat platform or OpenShift through virtualization, which is a unique technology that Red Hat has provided to the industry.

From a security standpoint, the most important security features in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) are the built-in security features already in place. Red Hat has recently introduced the Lightweight feature, which is in high demand in the market because it allows for customizable security options.

I have tried both Leapp and Red Hat Insights depending on client demand. Sometimes I prefer one, but if the client is not ready for that option, I must proceed with what they prefer.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) Image Builder is my primary tool for this work. Most clients want to customize their images rather than use standard ones provided with the ISO. When clients prefer certain elements to remain while requesting the removal of others, the Image Builder is used to meet their specifications.

One improvement I would like to see in technical support and customer service is that sometimes the technical team asks random questions. When a priority ticket has been raised and immediate responses are needed, they keep asking for repeated information, which feels like a strategy to buy time and can be quite frustrating.

Aside from support improvements, I currently do not have anything else in mind that I would like to see enhanced in Red Hat. One crucial missing feature regarding security is something I would like to see enhanced. Red Hat has great potential in this area, and they recently presented the Lightwell tool, which I am currently exploring and look forward to sharing my experience with.

I have been working with Red Hat Enterprise Linux for 18 years.

In terms of stability and reliability, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is stable.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is scalable. Specifically, in the OpenShift area where I have worked for the last ten years, the environment can be scaled up and down at any time.

I would rate the knowledge base offered by Red Hat at 9 out of 10. The Red Hat knowledge base contains all the information needed for newcomers looking to explore their career in Red Hat. All documentation is available, and if you are good at reading or connecting the dots, you can utilize it without help from third parties.

My use of Red Hat in a hybrid environment is supported by the premium model, which provides all kinds of support. Most of my clients run Enterprise Linux servers in production environments, so the premium support option is typically used.

Red Hat helps solve many specific pain points, especially when stuck on a production issue and unable to find the root cause. In those moments, reaching out to Red Hat with a priority one support case results in immediate response and assistance.

I would rate the technical support team a 7 out of 10.

The initial setup process with Red Hat is not overly complex unless customized applications are involved, which Red Hat does not support directly. This is the only challenge encountered, as their support is limited to their own products rather than customized ones.

In terms of cost-effectiveness, this completely depends on what is being used and what the business needs are. Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) does bring a return on investment, but it varies based on those factors.

It depends on the client and the relationship they have with Red Hat. Sometimes, Red Hat offers significant discounts to clients running extensive environments with hundreds of Enterprise Linux servers and services such as Ansible and OpenShift.

Most of the time, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is procured directly from Red Hat rather than from other marketplaces.

When comparing the business value of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) against other Linux distributions I have used, RHEL is prioritized for running business applications. Although some customers choose to use SUSE or Fedora, for production applications, Red Hat Enterprise Linux is the preferred choice.

I currently represent a Center of Excellence (COE) for Red Hat OpenShift, maintaining a business relationship with Red Hat.

For others looking to implement Red Hat technologies, my recommendation is significant. Since the Broadcom takeover, companies seem to be moving away from VMware virtualization to Red Hat OpenShift or Red Hat Virtualization, with many preferring OpenShift for migrating existing workloads to containerized formats.

I use Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for administration, automation scripts, storage, and Docker containers. My workloads include general workloads and virtualization across various environments.

I implement hardening practices and ensure compliance with PCI DSS and NIST standards. My deployment is on-premises in a private cloud environment.

Our environment is air-gapped and isolated from the internet. My journey with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) includes administration, storage, services, and systemd service management.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is an excellent product. It is very easy to use, useful, and delivers strong performance and security with freedom and customization options.

The security environment maintenance is important to me. The product is quite easy to work with.

The upgrade and migration processes are wonderful and easy. Migration is a smooth process that depends on the migration workloads and the specific application systems involved.

I use Image Builder primarily for upgrading Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) versions when I am using leap. I use this tool every day. The product is very complex yet very friendly and easy to understand.

I would like to see improvements in automation scripts, vulnerabilities detection and resolution, and intrusion detection capabilities.

I have used Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) for six years.

I experience very reduced and low stability issues. I encounter less than one hour of downtime in a year.

Scalability is easy to manage.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) customer service has been responsive.

The initial setup involves easy steps and is very friendly. The deployment is fast for running.

I have achieved a 40% return on investment through money and time savings. The time savings is more important than the monetary savings.

My managers consider the setup cost to be very expensive.

Other Red Hat-based alternatives include Oracle, Rocky Linux, and AlmaLinux. Red Hat and Oracle are better and recommended for enterprise use due to their resources and features, which are more interesting for enterprise deployments.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is friendly compared to alternatives. Key differentiating features include Ksplice and Ktrace.

I would rate Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 10 out of 10 points. The product excels in performance, security, ease of change management, reliability, availability, and serviceability, which are very important for administration. The tools available, support guides, forums, and community support are valuable resources.