I am planning on colocating a web server with 300 domains that uses a low to medium amount of bandwidth each. The place I'm looking at offers a connection via a 10Base-T connection which = 10Mbps of burstable bandwidth.

Would 10Mbps be fast enough?

Originally posted by steve93138
I am planning on colocating a web server with 300 domains that uses a low to medium amount of bandwidth each. The place I'm looking at offers a connection via a 10Base-T connection which = 10Mbps of burstable bandwidth.

Would 10Mbps be fast enough?

For you it should be alright since you're not pushing alot of traffic, but If your sites get very busy you will notice a slow down. 10mbps is sufficient for most.

How much traffic do you normally have during the day? If it's under 9 Mbps (I would bet it is), there will be no problems at all. The only time you will see a problem is if you try to burst over 9 Mbps.

Hope that helps!

The rule for bandwidth seems to be to try to stay under 50% utilization. If you're using 5 Mbps sustained, you might want to consider something faster.

Of course, RackMy.com probably knows a lot more than I do. :)

dude... remember, he said 10Base-T... not 10Base-TX... usable bandwidth ~ 7Mbps... half duplex... :P o... n 10Mbps... (err, 7), is a LOT of bandwidth... should b more than enough 4 hosting regular websites... :)

Heh, I forgot about that.

I agree that even 10 Mbps (or ~7) is a lot for a single server, but I'd like to know... WHY are they still using 10BaseT? (That's the stuff that has BNC connectors, isn't it?) I suppose a whole data center might be different than my house, but I've been using full-duplex for quite a few years now, and, at times, it *really* pays off (transferring massive tarballs, for example). I'm sure someome makes them, but I haven't even seen 10BaseT cards for a while -- everything seems to be 10/100 UTP now.

So, in short... 10BaseT will probably work just fine, but I do think it's about time they upgraded. I've seen Gigabit (over copper) cards for $35, though I don't have a clue how reliable they are. (Gigabit switches, though, are like $200 a port...)

ohh... i think that stuff with BNC cables is 10Base-5... (i know having a number there is wierd)... but i think thats it... heh... 10Base-T i am sure is the one with the RJ45 connectors...

next thing ya know, we'll find out they're using hubs instead of switches, in a commercial hosting environment... lol... i remember when i used to do that... lol... o heck, i remember my first colo... they had one of those 'el cheapo no-name 32 port 10Base-T ethernet hubs... lol... which connected directly into a Cisco 7515 (or is that 7513)... regardless... a REALLY nice router... heh... with their OC3 n all

oooo... and the hub... they were a local ISP (larger one at that)... and their mail server (sun enterprise 450) was on the same hub!!!! so... all i had to do with run a packet sniffer, and i could gain literally thousands of dialup accounts per day (same login/pass as their mail acct)... lol... i tried it out for a bit just to play around... but i was on cable at the time and didn't have a modem, so dialup accounts were no use to me...

I think you're right about it being 10Base-5. I used to run 10BaseT, and it was RJ-45, you're right.

What I love even more than having a cheap hub... Is having a myriad of hubs chained together. I'd like to think it's been fixed, but my local school had a lab (two, actually) of about 30 PCs. The computers were interconnected by a HUGE mess of hubs, a mixture of four and 8 port models. So they had like five to ten hubs, all coming off of... Other hubs. I'm pretty sure I saw hubs 'daisy chained' together -- one hub was plugged into another hub, and a hub was plugged into *that* hub... It was *THE* most convoluted mess I've ever seen. And this huge knot of hubs... Was connected to a 56K frame relay.

And to think I ran telnet and ftp from there to my house. :blush:

but now imagine that situation with an ISP that actually had an OC3!!!! with the sweetest routing equipment ... and very nice USR TotalControl dialup modem racks running off channelized T1s (PRI)... now that b some messed up sh*t... lol...

not to forget a Sun Enterprise 450 server... i mean... that box put some of my current servers to shame... and this was many many years ago... lol

Heh, I figured you were exaggerating when you said they had an OC3.

So they had a single 10BaseT hub... Going into the OC3? Or did they have multiple hubs? (At least 15, if they want have a chance of using the whole OC3...) Either way, that's ridiculous.

I was actually thinking about how powerful the 450 was -- that's a quad Sparc. I'd guess they've gotten beefed up over the years, but they still go for like $10K on eBay...

If they can spend like $100,000/month (I haven't exactly priced an OC3 lately; is this still an accurate figure?), and at least $10,000 on a server... Why can't they spend like $1,000 for a decent switch?

That's truly insane. I'm waiting for someone to star a colo/dedicated server place (particularly one that already hugely oversells) offer Gigabit NICs. I bet you that it'll happen in a year's time.

all the colo and mail was running off one 10Mbps port on the router... the news server running on another 10Mbps port... and the dialup lines outa that location on another 10Mbps port... they were using only like 15Mbps peak on that OC3 from what i was told... heh...

this is a couple years ago when 15Mbps was insanely high bandwidth... heh...

Hehe. I still don't see why they continued to pay for an OC3. Unless I had some SERIOUS money to waste, I'd 'downgrade' to a T3... If they got a full T3, they'd only use 1/3 of it, and they could always get a fractional T3.

This is akin to replacing my cable modem with a Gigabit Cogent line when I can't even find a way to hit the limits of my cable modem. And only having one computer on it, via a 100 Mbps connection. And then reselling hosting space through my 100 Mbps computer, over a 9600 bps serial link. :eek:

I assume you've either changed companies, or they've learned a bit? :)

lol... well, they only had to pay for what they used ... (in Mbps)... heh

and the reasoning behind the OC3... local loop = bloody cheap because they were like 2 blocks away from the telus telco plant... heh... :) additionally, OC3 looks a lot better on ads... well, not OC3... but the fact they can say they have a fiber optic connection... as opposed to saying they have a copper T3 connection

lol

o dude... those fags, i changed so long ago... they screwed me over sooo bad... (took my servers down/etc w/o notice or warning for using too much bandwidth on an unlimited plan)... and there was a signed contract n all... and this is a plan that was advertised in the news paper and all, with no restrictions/etc... !!! and this is before everybody started realizing that unlimited was not possible... lol.. especially when they brag about having 90% of their feed available

lol