I've been with FDC for a few weeks now and still have a Packet loss problem.

I've had an average of 10% packet loss ever since I got my server, with a high of 85% (yes, 85...) 2 days ago. The average is probably around 23% during peak hours. These tests were performed long enough for the information to be reliable (except for the 85% one... I stopped it after only 40 packets).

FDC were told a couple of times, but the problem won't go away.

Anyone with them have a similar problem? Any suggestions?

Thanks

Originally posted by prime
I've been with FDC for a few weeks now and still have a Packet loss problem.

I've had an average of 10% packet loss ever since I got my server, with a high of 85% (yes, 85...) 2 days ago. The average is probably around 23% during peak hours. These tests were performed long enough for the information to be reliable (except for the 85% one... I stopped it after only 40 packets).

FDC were told a couple of times, but the problem won't go away.

Anyone with them have a similar problem? Any suggestions?

Thanks

Yep, i have packet loss as well, ranging from 10% to 20%.... but usually it's at 0% so, I'm not sure where to problem is (I'm guessing it's not with FDCservers right now) (edit:I have a 9% loss right now)

I do have a problem with the download speed of one server... which is ridiculously low, however upload speed is incredibly high!? But I'm waiting for FDCservers to swap the NIC...

might want to see if you can get ahold of the MRTG graphs for their uplink, or at least the one you're on. If its pushing over 80mbps, you likely have your cause right there (as i realise they offer a lot of unlimited).

I've had a packet loss problem twice, turned out to be a faulty switch. Just contact Petr and send a few traceroutes allong with your email. Took them an hour to fix in my case.

Originally posted by Tazzman
I've had a packet loss problem twice, turned out to be a faulty switch. Just contact Petr and send a few traceroutes allong with your email. Took them an hour to fix in my case.

I have and he suggest switching the nic.... I've send him an email today asking when it will happen...

Tazzman, how would you rate the communication with fdcservers? I'm looking to buy more, but I"m a bit hesitant still.... so, what's your opinion?

might want to see if you can get ahold of the MRTG graphs for their uplink, or at least the one you're on. If its pushing over 80mbps, you likely have your cause right there (as i realise they offer a lot of unlimited).

Seems ok, I guess.. Just taken from their web site, while I had a 12% packet loss...

Current bandwidth usage is: 28.5 kb/sec in, 640.0 kb/sec out, 668.5 kb/sec total.

Total bandwidth usage is: 41.323 GB in, 589.749 GB out, 631.072 GB total.

Maximum bandwidth usage is: 5704.9 kb/sec in, 46381.5 kb/sec out, 36363.0 kb/sec total.


Bandwidth logging was started at Sunday, 02-Jun-2002 00:00:01 CDT .
The current server time is Monday, 24-Jun-2002 12:32:00 CDT.

I've had a packet loss problem twice, turned out to be a faulty switch. Just contact Petr and send a few traceroutes allong with your email. Took them an hour to fix in my case.
I contacted him a few times already, and everytime he said he moved the server to another switch...

With that packet loss problem, my old server (with a 256kbps link) is faster than the one I got @ FDC... :(

Petr has tried to be helpful, and he's usually quick to answer emails. Unfortunately, that's not what I need. All I need is a stable link and server. No assistance is required in server operations.

Oh well... :(

I'm getting 0% packet loss now.... :) However the download speed from my server is bad again..... sigh....

I'd rate my communication with Petr as reasonable. I can always seem to get in touch with him when I need him, but sometimes the response time could be better.

I'm getting a second server myself and I will not be getting it with fdc. This has nothing to do with fdc, as I have no real complaints about them, but I just think it's better to have servers in different locations so they don't stand the chance of all going offline at the same time...

Originally posted by Tazzman
I'd rate my communication with Petr as reasonable. I can always seem to get in touch with him when I need him, but sometimes the response time could be better.

I'm getting a second server myself and I will not be getting it with fdc. This has nothing to do with the fact that fdc is bad, as I have no real complaints about them, but I just think it's better to have servers in different locations so they don't stand the chance of all going offline at the same time...

Yes, that's my opinion too right now.... it's that the price is so good.... ah, well, I'll see what happens with my current server and make a decision based on that....

I'm getting 0% packet loss now....
Want to switch with me?...

However the download speed from my server is bad again.....
Nevermind ;)

Tazzman:
This has nothing to do with the fact that fdc is bad
You have a funny way of putting it...

Hehe, that came out the wrong way ;)

How to rephrase...

hehe... didn't even notice that!

"This has nothing to do with the quality of FDC's service" would've been a better way to say it :D

Originally posted by prime


Seems ok, I guess.. Just taken from their web site, while I had a 12% packet loss...

Current bandwidth usage is: 28.5 kb/sec in, 640.0 kb/sec out, 668.5 kb/sec total.

Total bandwidth usage is: 41.323 GB in, 589.749 GB out, 631.072 GB total.

Maximum bandwidth usage is: 5704.9 kb/sec in, 46381.5 kb/sec out, 36363.0 kb/sec total.


Just thought I'd note that that's just one of their customers' server's bandwidth usage (well, mine actually), not their entire network. I've not been having any problems with packetloss for what it's worth, but my box isn't on their "main" link.

Just thought I'd note that that's just one of their customers' server's bandwidth usage (well, mine actually), not their entire network. I've not been having any problems with packetloss for what it's worth, but my box isn't on their "main" link.

Right... I assumed it was from a customer's web site, but it is also the only info they give on their website, so I expected it to be representative of their network status.

14% now...

And I didn't expect to see you here either ;)... Is everyone operating a server here? It sure looks that way!:(

Actually, I also want to host a server at FDC. But when I see there is so many problem recently, I really need to think it twice.

I am consider to use RS 10Mbit Un-metered server or FDC, one of the good reason for using FDC is they can burst to 100Mbit but it seems RS is more reliable.

So what you guys suggest?

maxbear> depends on how much cash you have to spend :). Also FDC is cogent only btw and I believe RS isn't...

Do you mean if I have more cash I should go with RS?

I just thought RS 10Mbit Un-metered is Congent only. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Rackshack's network seems to have a better record than FDC. At the very least, if your cogent connection goes down at rackshack, they probably will be willing to hook you up to other provider, whereas with FDC you are pretty much down completely with no backup.

FDC is good if you have budget constraint, otherwise, I think you should go with rackshack. (or even some expensive provider, if you can afford it).

Peter

Originally posted by ckpeter
Rackshack's network seems to have a better record than FDC. At the very least, if your cogent connection goes down at rackshack, they probably will be willing to hook you up to other provider, whereas with FDC you are pretty much down completely with no backup.

FDC is good if you have budget constraint, otherwise, I think you should go with rackshack. (or even some expensive provider, if you can afford it).

Peter

maxbear, that's ---^ what I meant to say!

Thanks guys :stickout

Packet loss could be a result of the NIC or the NIC's driver. I was involved in an in-depth study of NICs under Linux about a year ago. The Intel NICs were hands down the best. 3Com was OK, but just OK, it suffered from packet loss. Other NICs were, in my opinion, just taking up space in the computer case. They suffered from low throughput and high levels of packet loss.

The Intel suffered from packet loss when using the "pre-Intel supplied" drivers. The Intel NICs have a problem with interrupt handling when under heavy load. This results in packet loss, and low throughput. However, the latest Linux drivers supplied by Intel correct firmware bugs in the NIC by uploading patches. These new drivers really rock. The performance with the Intel NICs together with the Intel drivers is far and away better than any other combination I tested.

Actually I'm having problems with an intel NIC, never had any problems with 3Com.... but I'm not using the intel supplied drivers, so I'll try that....