Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 73
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    782

    whats with nocster?

    I was considering nocster for dedicated server(s) but i keep seeing all these people have terrible connectivity issues. Could someone suggest another alternative or are these connectivity issues not affecting everyone at nocster??
    Last edited by neonlexx; 07-12-2002 at 11:15 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    www.staminus.net

    Maybe not as cheap prices as nocster, but the level of support has been excellent!

    PM for a link to test the download speeds.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    782

    ouch!

    thats quite expensive...i dont wanna spend more then 200/month (with cpanel)

    but you get what you pay for.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    Thats correct, also its not cogent bandwidth - its UUnet & Savvis - quality bandwidth..

    Cogent = cheap garbage.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    366
    I have been with Nocster since day one. Recently I had been having some connection problems. They didn't mess around and took care of it. I am very happy with the service.

  6. #6
    Me too, but question is that we need stable service! I am also in NOCSTER.

    Originally posted by Andyc
    I have been with Nocster since day one. Recently I had been having some connection problems. They didn't mess around and took care of it. I am very happy with the service.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,084
    I think Nocster handled it pretty well. They initially turned on Cogent, it must have been problematic (lost packets, really slow connections, etc) so they turned it off until it was stable. Cogent is back on, no lost packets and fast speeds still. That, at least, is my experience so far.

  8. #8
    What is the cogent line? No good?

    Originally posted by edude
    Thats correct, also its not cogent bandwidth - its UUnet & Savvis - quality bandwidth..

    Cogent = cheap garbage.

  9. #9
    go http://webhostingtalk.com/showthread...threadid=60364

    try to ping your ip with -t parameter/ Keep it run for 5 mins. You can see you will get Response Timed Out almost every 40 response back depending on your connection speed. Keep you going, you will find more!

    ping ip -t

    Originally posted by amusive.com
    I think Nocster handled it pretty well. They initially turned on Cogent, it must have been problematic (lost packets, really slow connections, etc) so they turned it off until it was stable. Cogent is back on, no lost packets and fast speeds still. That, at least, is my experience so far.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,084
    Originally posted by feng
    go http://webhostingtalk.com/showthread...threadid=60364

    try to ping your ip with -t parameter/ Keep it run for 5 mins. You can see you will get Response Timed Out almost every 40 response back depending on your connection speed. Keep you going, you will find more!

    ping ip -t

    I saw your other post. Doing this to my server gives a timeout of around 1%, which isn't very bad (although I do agree typically you don't see much packet loss). If I up the amount of time it waits for a ping to return, though, I get almost no loss.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    Cogent is very cheap bandwidth, they also have alot of problems with their routing..

    Look at this post:
    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...ogent+problems



    Originally posted by feng
    What is the cogent line? No good?


  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    180
    Man I wish some of my clients could be here to defend Cogent . 2 years and have had no downtime or routing problems whatsoever...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    Cogent won't last for long, mark my words

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,084
    Originally posted by edude
    Cogent won't last for long, mark my words

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    180
    if it's not Cogent it will be under another name! When is the last time you have seen a major provider go under and close doors? Hell my local DSL provider went under, but some other company bought all there clients and service was never touched or interrupted. Plus we have nice contract with Cogent ;-)

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Kalamazoo
    Posts
    33,190
    I think it's unfair to blame it on cogent. There just seems to be some problems adding the line. I have full confidence that Nocster will get it sorted out. And soon.

    No worries here.
    There is no best host. There is only the host that's best for you.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    180
    I agree, there are a lot of bad providers out there that give Cogent and hosting a bad name! I usually don't care how other providers network run, but last night I was approached by a new customer showing me his old server on a "10MBit Unlimited Connection"

    The other provider was downloading at a measly 16K per sec and took over 7 minutes to download a 8meg file.

    While hoping on our server he grabbed the file in 8 seconds at 1MEG a sec.

    We both have Cogent, am I to believe that Cogent is screwing them and providing bad bandiwdth, I doubt it. There are a lot of hard working and good providers out there!

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    heh..

    Cogent informants spill all
    June 1, 2002
    By: Dan Sweeney
    America's Network

    During the past several months we have written several articles dealing with the travails and failures of competitive high-speed access providers.

    NEW DIRT
    Now disturbing reports are emanating from individuals associated with Cogent Communications. Insiders have spoken to us on background, alleging severe problems at the Washington, D.C.-based service provider which, with Yipes, appeared to pose the most serious challenge.

    According to our first informant, a marketing manager with the firm who recently tendered his resignation, Cogent has experienced little success in signing customers in the buildings it has targeted for service. "Four per building was pretty typical," Informant One said. "And some areas were much worse. In Texas we were averaging under one per building."

    Cogent CEO Dave Schaeffer did not provide an average for subscribers per building but acknowledged that in some areas the number is quite low.

    Schaeffer maintained that buildings were carefully pre-selected on the basis of the type of businesses occupying them as well as the distance of the building from a fiber ring. He claimed that more than 100,000 office buildings were studied before an initial list of roughly 3,000 prospects was compiled.

    When we repeated that, Informant One snorted in disbelief. "Dave is very persuasive, but if we'd done all that market research, why were we so unsuccessful?"

    Schaeffer disputed this.

    Our second informant, a laid-off sales agent, was also contemptuous regarding Schaeffer's due diligence claim. "They sent me out to scout buildings in New York; that was the due diligence. I must have done 30 of them, walking the floors and checking out businesses in my territory. I had a couple of days to do it - visit 30 so-called 'Class A' buildings and try to make determinations. Then I was supposed to start selling to accounts."

    According to all four informants, lack of success was largely attributable to lack of demand. Noted Informant Three, a manager involved in right-of-access transactions with the building owners, "A hundred megabits is simply more than medium-sized businesses, the kind we had targeted, either want or need. The fact that we didn't offer transparent LAN or voice or conferencing or Web hosting or storage networking hurt us also. Cogent didn't want to bother with provisioning value-added services, but that's what a lot of potential customers wanted."

    Schaeffer disagreed. "If you look at how quickly we've acquired customers, you'd have to conclude the service is in high demand. And we do offer service level agreements; the terms are right on our Web site. It is true that we don't offer some of the services provided by other data networks, particularly transparent LANs, but our market research showed that demand is higher for what we offer: basic high speed Internet access. And people are signing up for it. Don't pay attention to disgruntled ex-employees; read our corporate report."

    Absent access to company financial records and projections, drawing firm conclusions is difficult.

    A fourth Cogent informant, the head of another competitive carrier that entered into negotiations with Cogent, commented, "Cogent's real competition was with business DSL providers in New York. Business-class DSL has been very popular in Manhattan, and it's much easier to provision than Cogent's fiber based service. It's perfectly adequate for the needs of most of Cogent's designated customer base, and it's cheaper."

    Don't bank on it

    Informant Two's account of the sales procedure, which is confirmed by our other three informants, is not such as to inspire confidence. "We signed up customers in buildings where we didn't even have fiber in place, and we weren't sure we could get it in," Informant Two said.

    Informant Two continued, "It usually took months to activate service, and I'd get constant phone calls from customers wondering when they'd be connected."

    Schaeffer commented, "It is absolutely correct that we did sign up customers where we didn't have fiber in place, but we were very upfront about it and indicated clearly what we were doing. After we got the signatures, we then went to the building owners to negotiate access into the building. The signatures indicated that the service was in demand and that a building that offered it would be more attractive to its tenants. The building owners were offered $1000 or 10% of the gross, whichever was more. In some cases we didn't reach agreements, but the customers were informed that that was a possibility."

    Informant One provided a more sinister explanation. "Schaeffer was taking these numbers to the investors, all these people signed up who weren't actually paying anything yet. It looked good on paper. I don't think he wanted to do it, but he felt he couldn't get further funding otherwise."

    Schaeffer denied such deception. "Our board knew exactly what we were doing and wholeheartedly endorsed it. It was the plan from the beginning."

    Informant One also indicated that sales commissions were paid on customer signatures before service was initiated or subscriptions paid.

    "We paid millions in sales commissions." Informant Two said. "I was very well compensated, and only a couple of the people I signed ever paid for service."

    Again Schaeffer didn't deny but asserted that the sales strategy was well-founded.

    Informant Three questioned another aspect of the service program, the lack of uniform long-term contracts. "Even when a customer was turned on, there was no assurance you could keep them because the company had a policy of charging from month to month, which I think makes no sense. "

    Schaeffer argued otherwise. "First of all, we did offer year-long contracts at guaranteed rates for those who wanted them. We didn't insist on such contracts, though. We thought that we had to prove ourselves to our customers, and we were confident that we could retain them.."

    Informant Three also alleged that Cogent suffered network performance limitations. "We never had really first-rate peering arrangements, and the network was stressed by large numbers of customers who were using the full 100 megabit capacity."

    Schaeffer denied any problems of this nature. "The network was architected to permit everyone to operate at the full data rate all of the time."

    A GOOD GUY
    None of Schaeffer's critics professed any animosity toward the man. All praised his intelligence and capacity for work.

    "Cogent was a pleasant place to work," said the former sales agent. "Everyone was always up; it was like a constant party."

    Schaeffer insisted that success will come. "We expect to achieve a true positive cash flow some time in 2004."

    Cogent's current stock valuation is less than $3 per share, but in the context of telecom today, that's not remarkable.

    "These are very hard times in telecom," Schaeffer said. "It's possible to benefit from that in that you can acquire distressed assets cheaply, but money is tight. Fortunately we've still got $100 million in the bank."

    By Schaeffer's admission the company still faces heavy expenses, many for the construction of fiber laterals to target buildings.

    Whatever Cogent's ultimate chances for success, the company is going against the industry grain in regard to the way it is crafting its business offerings.

    Value-added services are the watchword today, not pure access, and the latest generation of metro optical equipment is designed for provisioning such services. Cogent is sticking to an older model that has been rejected by almost everyone else.

    Moreover, one has to wonder about the future profitability of a business that charges so little for a service that is necessarily expensive to provision.

    It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the market in which Cogent has chosen to be active is extraordinarily difficult.

    Whether Cogent's resolutely old-fashioned basic service offering and differentiated business plan based upon that offering will enable it to succeed where so many others have failed, remains to be seen.

  19. #19
    Exactly, We really don't care if that is cogent, or dogent or whatever, as long as we have no more downtime! I am tired of choosing DS company.


    Originally posted by Goose
    if it's not Cogent it will be under another name! When is the last time you have seen a major provider go under and close doors? Hell my local DSL provider went under, but some other company bought all there clients and service was never touched or interrupted. Plus we have nice contract with Cogent ;-)

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    4,962
    Ohh about 6 months ago weren't people saying they wouldn't last 6 months???
    -Mat Sumpter
    Director, Product Engagement
    Penton Media

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Kalamazoo
    Posts
    33,190
    Not to mention; RackShacks pricing means there's no way they can remain viable.
    There is no best host. There is only the host that's best for you.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    Prohacker, i didnt say it 6 months ago, just wait and see

  23. #23
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    180
    Feng yeah I am just trying to say that it's not Cogent, call your provider and have them fix there stupid problems!

  24. #24
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    4,962
    Originally posted by edude
    Prohacker, i didnt say it 6 months ago, just wait and see

    I didn't say it was you... But alot of people did...

    Cogent is actually good for customers, with really cheap pipes, data centers can renegotiate their contracts with providers and get lower prices over all...

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    And just say, if cogent goes out of business (no technical terms)..

    Alot of people will be left stranded

  26. #26
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    4,962
    Originally posted by edude
    And just say, if cogent goes out of business (no technical terms)..

    Alot of people will be left stranded

    I really don't see them going outa business.... But they are upping prices soon....

    Well if someone is building their entire business off of one provider, any provider they deserve to be left stranded...

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,084
    Originally posted by edude
    heh..
    During the past several months we have written several articles dealing with the travails and failures of competitive high-speed access providers.

    Aside from your ability to copy and paste copywritten articles, I don't really know what the article is supposed to say. A telecom in distress? Look at every other one, and stories are typically worse. Should everyone drop UUnet? Nothing in that article is more damning than what's going on there. As far as I know, and correct me if I'm wrong, but there is no provider out there smiling -- even those charging double, triple, or much more than Cogent's pricing. That seems a sign of a far worse business model than Cogent... especially since many of those tier-1 providers live only on their LD business, their bandwidth sales being in the red.

    So, again:

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    Savvis is fine

    BTW: thanks for pointing that out, i just learn't how to copy and paste..

    Everyone who uses cogent bandwidth should stand up for them

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Mass
    Posts
    726
    Cogent won't last for long, mark my words
    Do you know how long people have been saying that?
    Jason

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    "SAVVIS' growing sales and strong operating performance are what have attracted investor interest," said Rob McCormick, chairman and chief executive officer of Savvis. "Bucking the trend in our industry, we will have a robust balance sheet when this transaction is completed, with only a modest amount of remaining debt and funds to ramp up sales of our IP VPN, managed hosting and Internet services. Unlike many of our competitors, Savvis is in strong financial health, and, from this position of strength, we are redoubling our commitment to drive revenue growth and continued margin improvement in 2002."

    Savvis also announced that it has reached agreement with GE Capital Vendor Financial Services to amend approximately $57 million of capital lease obligations. The amended lease provides for repayment at the end of the fifth year and 12 percent interest payable in cash or in kind, at Savvis' option, for the first three years.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Kalamazoo
    Posts
    33,190
    Yep. Ya mention cogent around here and it's about like saying UNLIMITED.


    *Ducks


    Whew! That was close!
    There is no best host. There is only the host that's best for you.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    Yes its similar to unlimited, the pricing structure is unbelieveable..

    Look at it this way, if a hosting company provides:

    100MB diskspace
    10000000000000000000 GB bandwidth (isn't that the same as unlimited? well similar anyway)

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,084
    Originally posted by edude
    Savvis is fine

    BTW: thanks for pointing that out, i just learn't how to copy and paste..

    Don't everyone who uses cogent bandwidth should stand up for them
    So besides quoting, nothing original to add to the conversation besides poor grammar?

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    Err your pathetic, i don't post on forums so people can question my grammar, i dont care about my grammar, its only a forum...

    bah

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,084
    Originally posted by edude
    Err your pathetic, i don't post on forums so people can question my grammar, i dont care about my grammar, its only a forum...

    bah
    So you just attack me personally... clever.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    5,954
    Originally posted by edude
    And just say, if cogent goes out of business (no technical terms)..

    Alot of people will be left stranded
    Yeesh, sounds like someone who doesen't have access to Cogent to me.

    I remember a lot of people talking crap about cogent, then praising other providers, specifically worldcom/uunet and comparing cogent to uunet going "cogent wont be around in a year, uunet will", etc. etc.

    Now look at the situation, cogents stocks are what? more then double UUNet's? UUNet is just waiting for someone to dunk the plunger to get flushed down the toilet, doubtless someone will pick up their customers, but thats aside the point.

    The point is, you can pick almost any provider out there, and guess what, you have absolutly no assurance they'll be around next month, for all we know, savvis could be pulling what uunet was with their financials. 6 months ago people thought UUNet was invincible with their popularity, extremely expensive services, etc. but now, their stocks are being removed from NasDaq if they dont improove within a month.

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    haha, so commenting about my grammar is not attacking me personally?

    So, english is not my first language, i doubt you could write in my language any better than i write in English.

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,280
    Originally posted by jayjay


    Do you know how long people have been saying that?
    In all fairness, Cogent hasn't been around that "long" !
    Greg Landis | Founder Jaguarpc - Keeping websites happy since 1998
    Managed IT Solutions - Business hosting | Virtual Private Servers | Cloud VPS Hosting | Dedicated servers | Backup service
    Follow us @ Facebook.com/Jaguarpc | Twitter: @JaguarPC | (888)-338-5261 | sales @ jaguarpc.com

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,084
    Originally posted by edude
    haha, so commenting about my grammar is not attacking me personally?
    Heh, well, if you do something, don't criticize someone else for doing it as well.

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Downunder..
    Posts
    2,612
    hmm, when did i criticize your grammar?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •