|
optikalus: which host are you? I'd like someone to talk about colocation costs... is 1 amp enough for a basic 1U server with two hard drives? 95% billing scares me - if I exceed my allotted bandwidth for just enough time I could be on the hook for huge overage charges, right? I'd rather have a set amount of transfer per month or a set maximum bandwidth (say 2mbps) and not even be ABLE to exceed it. Is that possible?
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2010 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 08:47 |
|
|
JHVH-1 posted:I work at http://www.choopa.com unmeteredservers.com pricing actually seems pretty good, but I wish they had colocation as an option. I'd rather provide my own hardware.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2010 20:04
|
|
|
optikalus posted:Where would you like to house your gear? I know most of the cheaper colos in the US that do single-server colocation. Also, what's your budget? As close to Buffalo, NY as possible, ideally. Budget is low, $50-80/mo, depending on where it is and what I'm getting.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2010 20:51
|
|
|
optikalus posted:WHT has been *the* place to find good deals on single-server colocation. They do look like a great resource for this, thanks for looking for me!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2010 03:56
|
|
|
Centipeed posted:Are there any cheap and decent (For low traffic and low space needs) web hosts in the UK? Check these few: http://www.ukvaluecomputing.co.uk/web-hosting/bronze_plan.php https://www.exoware.net/clients/cart.php?a=add&pid=1 (this one is only 5 quid with code "FIVER" when signing up, probably goes to up 23.40/yr after that.) http://www.studyhost.co.uk/ (Use code "FailOffer for 25% off, plans starting under 10 pounds a year)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2010 02:23
|
|
|
auruspex posted:I'll jump on this bandwagon too and mention that I work for HostDime (as well as SurpassHosting), along with a few other goons. Can we get added to the OP as well? HostDime does Shared, Reseller, VPS, Dedicated, and Colocated Servers out of our main Orlando, FL Datacenter as well as our 6 other locations throughout the world. Surpass Hosting (surpasshosting.com) does Shared, Reseller, VPS, and Dedicated via our Orlando Datacenter as well as our space in the UK. HostDime has an anti-IRC policy, which is pretty ridiculous. But you allow game servers, which makes so much sense, right? Game servers: High bandwidth, high cpu, target of attack IRC: extremely low bandwidth, low cpu, target of attack MAYBE if you're doing shady crap. Asinine.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2010 20:47
|
|
|
Aleksei Vasiliev posted:Most of the VPS hosts I've seen forbid IRC. Burst.Net autoscans for "ircd.conf" and warns anybody with it that they need to remove it immediately. Note that I only look at cheap (<$15/mo) plans. High end servers will allow more. I'm not even talking about running irc servers just IRC in general. Although I think banning ircds is lame as well. Ban the abusers not the entire idea.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 02:30
|
|
|
Aleksei Vasiliev posted:An IRC server that gets hit with a DDoS would be a problem. There are tons of private tiny little IRC networks that barely get any activity, let alone attacks. There are tons of IRC channels on major networks that are not attack magnets as well. The policy is beyond stupid.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 02:50
|
|
|
Stacie posted:IRC is more prone to abuse and requires semi-open shell access. These are virtual private servers and dedicated servers which by default have wide open shells and root access. What is so hard about maintaining an IRCD? Not that maintenance of services has ANYTHING to do with the host. It's completely up to the customer. Not the host's problem. And besides that, I'm not even talking about running an IRCD. sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 07:44 on Apr 28, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 07:41
|
|
|
Stacie posted:I'm not sure why you are arguing with somebody who runs a shell hosting company for over 7 years. I'm not really sure what you're talking about... I think we're talking about different things. IRCD = IRC Server = Server to which users connect in order to chat in IRC channels. Shell accounts offering IRC access for things like bnc and eggdrop bots are completely different. I would never want to run a service like that. edit: I would believe you if you told me the majority of those "shell accounts" are abused, but I don't think most VPS (at least higher end ones)/Dedi/Colo users are intending to get into shady bullshit with their expensive servers. sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Apr 28, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 17:57
|
|
|
I don't mean to poo poo up the thread, I think it's relevant discussion, but I apologize if I am. IRC is important to me, yes. I use it daily. If I'm paying money for a dedicated server then I expect to be able to do anything that I want with it, as long as it's legal and not causing problems for my host.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2010 19:03
|
|
|
Stacie posted:I think we were initially talking about a different things; 'shady' users will mostly use VPS to host IRCd servers for sole purpose of connecting and controlling infected computers on the network. If you want to be condescending and talk to me like I have no experience with this stuff, that's fine, but realize this: 1) Not all IRC users are fraudsters/hackers/malignant in any way. 2) I'm not even talking about running an ircd 3) You can do illegal poo poo by http too (kiddie porn, satellite hacking forums, carding forums, etc etc etc etc) so why don't you shut down http traffic too? ALL I am saying is that it is ridiculous to block an entire protocol because of a few bad apples. I have a real credit card, in my name, and I want to give you money, but you won't take it because I like to idle in IRC channels about math, electronics, and photography. That's not that great either. It's your company though and if you'd like to continue on with ridiculous beliefs that anyone with an interest in IRC is going to gently caress you over, that's your right.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2010 02:41
|
|
|
R1CH posted:The simple fact is that IRC has a long history of attracting DDoS and other bad things. Why risk downtime for your entire host or datacenter over one guy on an IRC channel? It has nothing to do with running a server too, I've seen a number of IRC clients get attacked because of dumb stuff: someone didn't like their nickname, was pissed off at the person, wanted to show off, etc. Actually I have zero problems finding IRC friendly hosts. There are tons of them; I would call them the majority. That's another reason I don't really understand no-IRC policy of some. I guess they had a really bad experience and are reacting to the extreme. I have no problems with a host booting you right off their network if you are causing any kind of problems. In your scenario, "X strikes rule," I would set X = 1. Arcana: A lot of shared hosts will fit the bill for you. I am using Site5 and I have had no problems with them. They're one of those "unlimited everything!!" shared hosts but for your specs I think it will be ok. Check the shared hosting links in the OP too. Some are goon-run and have goon specials. Shop around there is no shortage of shared hosting companies. sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Apr 29, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2010 18:41
|
|
|
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/04/prweb3895124.htm Same company, right?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2010 00:38
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:That's written by the marketing department, it's not a news article. I know but I guess it seems weird to me that a small private company would feel the need to issue a grandiose press release if they're actually failing. They could just keep quiet and potential/current customers wouldn't know the difference, right? Not that I have ANY knowledge of their situation either way, of course.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2010 00:56
|
|
|
They're not accepting new customers at the moment anyways.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2010 06:19
|
|
|
Biowarfare posted:General consensus is "anything, even a pile of dog crap, is a better domain registrar than 1and1" fixed that for you
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2011 17:45
|
|
|
Why do dedicated servers generally come with hard drives smaller than you can even buy anymore? From what I've seen, they're just consumer SATA drives and you'd think for what decent dedicated boxes cost they could throw in a $60 1tb hard drive. I could understand if they were enterprise quality drives but they generally are not.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2011 03:31
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Anyone else have reviews of other low-price VPS providers? I was thinking about buying a 256MB VPS from either Host90 or VirtualSRV (or someone else from https://www.lowendbox.com) to play around with. That site has a forum but nobody talks about actually doing anything with their VPS except collecting them or running speedtests. collecting ... VPS? 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2011 17:13
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:http://www.lowendtalk.com/questions/8502/how-many-lebs-do-you-have haha amazing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2011 19:20
|
|
|
wanderlost posted:Anyone out there using Amazon's EC2 & S3 as web host? Free tier only lasts a year.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2011 00:00
|
|
|
wanderlost posted:I thought that one big advantage of ECC was how quickly more servers could be provisioned. I don't think I'm going to get a lot of traffic, 99% of the time, but when those spikes come, being able to add more servers, on demand, with only an hourly commitment should take care of this no? Yeah, the part you're missing is that load balancing doesn't just happen automagically. So you spin up another instance... now what? Also, don't forget that you pay for bandwidth and storage in addition to compute time. edit: Honestly, EC2 is a fairly ridiculous way to serve a relatively low volume static content website. sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Sep 11, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2011 02:19
|
|
|
Moey posted:I have heard this a ton, but what is the downfall of registering domains through them? Having to deal with them and their absolutely ridiculous website. If that's not enough of a downside for you then you probably only have 1 domain or something. Or really low standards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
Quodio Stotes posted:Complete rookie here. I was wondering there is specific domain name I want but it is being "parked" by godaddy. Only godaddy ads all over it. On the Godaddy main page it say I can "domain name backorder" for $20 which seems kind of stupid/questionable. Is there anyway I can contact the person who owns the rights to the address to hand it odd/ how can I get my hands on the name (it is not an interesting or "hot" domain name at all). Look it up on whois.net to get contact information for the domain. You want to use the top one, "WHOIS Lookup"
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2011 05:42
|
|
|
How much RAM do I realistically need on a debian 6 VPS to host some static sites and a mediawiki with a very small number of users/viewers?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2011 15:05
|
|
|
I have one of the $10/yr OpenVZ VPSs at buyvm.net for messing around with. It has 128mb guaranteed/256mb burstable. I installed mediawiki, apache2, mysql, php, and whatever else (using apt). It shot up to 255mb used and the wiki was barely accessible. I am told this might have something to do with OpenVZ being a pile of poo poo, though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2011 15:28
|
|
|
I want Mediawiki 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2011 16:05
|
|
|
Saoshyant posted:Considering this is a hosting megathread and there's no thread specific for domain registrars, I thought about making one for my question, but I don't want to step on anyone's toes, so let's try here first. Are you really that worried about $2/month for your business?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2011 14:55
|
|
|
In case you GoDaddy users or prospective GoDaddy users needed any more reason to switch or not use them, those assholes are supporting SOPA.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2011 16:57
|
|
|
Rufo posted:Bundlebox addresses are valid addresses you can have poo poo mailed to, hth Bundlebox costs $15 just to sign up and seems geared towards re-shipping packages to countries other than the US for huge sums of money, hth.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2011 19:44
|
|
|
I just pay the $1/yr or whatever it is for whoisguard and I have no problem with that. I don't need the complication of adding yet another service and layer of abstraction to things.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2011 20:07
|
|
|
Also, GoDaddy, the poo poo heels that they are, have instantly caved to the pressure and reversed their stance on SOPA. Hilarious. What a bad company.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2011 20:08
|
|
|
mediawiki
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Anyone in Europe looking for a cheap dedicated host, altho unmanaged, check out Hetzner.de. I've had a box there for three years now, went to upgrade mine today. 49€ a month for a Core i7-2600, 16GB DDR3 and 2x 3TB in a software RAID1. 25€/month extra for Windows Server 2008. Their site says 8gb and 2x750gb. Still a good price for those specs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2012 10:49
|
|
|
Ah, thanks. Wow.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2012 10:54
|
|
|
I am not white-knighting dreamhost, but going by a sales rep's word and not reading the TOS was not wise on your part. The good news is that you can still use cheap shared webhosting for actual websites, staying in line with the TOS, and get a cheap VPS for your file sharing needs. Or use the VPS for everything.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
VerySolidSnake posted:I talked with a representative of the company about what I needed and my exact plans for using their service. They green lighted it. How the hell are you spinning this to my fault? Why would I check the TOS for those terms when a representative whose job is to know the TOS inside out told me it was ok? You really need to relax and use this as a learning experience. There is a very clear consensus here that the responsibility to understand the TOS that you agreed to is yours and yours alone. Sales people are not necessarily technically savvy and they may stretch the truth or even outright lie to you to get a sale. Now you know this firsthand and you are better off because of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
VerySolidSnake posted:The websites were not personal backups. It was a full website with files, logins, everything displayed with HTML. There were email notifications sent out and a public facing login page. Reading this section without talking to the representative I still would of still created the websites. You're a little dense. Let me help you: quote:Personal Backups The bold parts are what you need to pay attention to. I hope I've cut it down enough that you can understand it. One would think that in your 7 years as a customer, you would read the policies you agreed to. One would also think that after violating the policy for 7 years you would understand that you finally got nicked for it and take it in a mature fashion, rather than having a tantrum about it. I have read a bunch of shared hosting agreements. Certainly not ALL of them but at least a dozen or so, and all of those have had the same policy. No files not related to the actual website. A folder full of random binaries in a cache directory does not meet this requirement. In the future, read what you are agreeing to and abide by the rules. Or violate them, but know that you are exposing yourself to action by the host to stop the violations from happening. edit: I would also like to respond to your claim that the TOS protects the company more than the customer. First of all, no poo poo. Second, that particular clause protects all of the other customers on your server from having their available space shrink to nothing because of your violations. edit2: I kind of doubt this would have happened at all if the files weren't in a cache directory, even though dreamhost had a right to do so either way. sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Jan 19, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
VerySolidSnake posted:A website with a large directory of files would violate the TOS then, such as a company listing all of their press releases and company documents. Since you are the expert, do those terms clearly state that if the website's directory of files is private instead, is it in violation? A directory full of press releases and company documents accessible on a company's website is exactly what they are allowing you to host. A private directory full of inaccessible files is exactly what the AUP prohibits. edit: Look, I know it sucks, but it's the reality of "UN-FUCKIN-LIMITED!!!!*" hosting. *limits and exclusions apply sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Jan 19, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2012 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 08:47 |
|
|
The AUP does not address that, leaving it up to the host's discretion. That's preferable to you as a customer because it means that you can probably get away with it indefinitely as long as you are not a resource hog. Check out the $15/yr VPS at buyvm.net You get 15gb of space and you can put whatever the heck you want on there. Cheaper than S3 and you get a VPS along with the space! It's fairly anemic on RAM and CPU, though, so you might want to keep your dreamhost (or other cheap shared hosting) account to serve up the websites while using the VPS for your random file swapping space and maybe some development.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2012 21:37
|
|