Results 1 to 25 of 34
-
09-17-2002, 01:13 PM #1Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 58
Why you should not host from a DSL connection
I have noticed that some hosting startups want to use a basic web server and their ADSL connections to get their hosting biz off the ground.
There are may reasons why this is a bad idea, as already mentioned, however here is a compelling reason why your customers will never get good connection speeds from your setup.
As we are developing some applications around networking products, particulary Packeteer PacketShapers, I have had a shaper connected to our LAN over the last few hours and all outbound traffic to the Internet has been flowing through the Shaper via a 500K ADSL connection (BT OpenWorld). As I have been the only person using the Internet connection, the traffic has just come from my usage of the net over that time.
The attached graph shows the network efficiency of the DSL link, and it is frightening how badly these links perform, as you can see. Having even a small number of concurrent users using this link would cause major contention and TCP re-transmission issues - resulting in your startup remaining just that!0
-
09-17-2002, 01:15 PM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Location
- Earth
- Posts
- 1,259
I think you forgot to "attach" the attached graph .
Frank█ Umbra Hosting
█ cPanel | Softaculous | CloudLinux | R1Soft | Ksplice
█ Web Hosting, Reseller Hosting, VPS, Dedicated Servers, Colocation
█ UmbraHosting.com0
-
09-17-2002, 01:27 PM #3Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 58
The file upload didn't work as the graph was too big (111Kb), so that has reduced the impact of my argument!
Basically the connection is running at about 75% efficiency, dipping to about 50% during big upload/downloads.
If anyone can think of a way of getting round the file upload restrictions here, let me know, and I'll post the graph (and others, if anyone is that interested!).0
-
09-17-2002, 01:28 PM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- London, UK
- Posts
- 9,039
hosting on DSL lol
Matt Wallis
United Communications Limited
High Performance Shared & Reseller | Managed VPS Cloud | Managed Dedicated
UK www.unitedhosting.co.uk | US www.unitedhosting.com | Since 1998.0
-
09-17-2002, 01:35 PM #5Newbie
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Posts
- 21
there is no problem with hosting a small personal site on dsl. hosting others on it is foolish
0
-
09-17-2002, 01:36 PM #6Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Posts
- 3,734
What 'hosting startups' are these that are doing this? Would be interesting to know.
0
-
09-17-2002, 01:43 PM #7Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 58
Heres's one example:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...threadid=74503
I checked again, still can't get the graph into the bulletin board - its the VB restrictions, not the DSL line!0
-
09-17-2002, 01:48 PM #8Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Location
- Michigan
- Posts
- 1,799
Originally posted by operandi
The file upload didn't work as the graph was too big (111Kb), so that has reduced the impact of my argument!
Basically the connection is running at about 75% efficiency, dipping to about 50% during big upload/downloads.
If anyone can think of a way of getting round the file upload restrictions here, let me know, and I'll post the graph (and others, if anyone is that interested!).
We'll just take your word for it. Now, do you know of anyone trying to host sites "for pay" on their home PC using their DSL?
That would just be stupid.DANG DANG! DANG!!™
I know ***** ripped off everybody else, but they wouldn't do it to me.
"When you use bottom feed for bait, you are only going to catch bottom feeders."
"You do what you are, and you are what you do."0
-
09-17-2002, 01:50 PM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Location
- Earth
- Posts
- 1,259
Well it's just not a good idea because most DSL/Cable providers forbid you from setting up servers in thier TOS.
Frank█ Umbra Hosting
█ cPanel | Softaculous | CloudLinux | R1Soft | Ksplice
█ Web Hosting, Reseller Hosting, VPS, Dedicated Servers, Colocation
█ UmbraHosting.com0
-
09-17-2002, 02:03 PM #10Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 58
I know a way! Upload it to your site and link to it. (or is that not allowed?)
Good thinking:
www.medianetrix.com/util.bmp - no ads or other info is there0
-
09-17-2002, 02:08 PM #11Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- London, UK
- Posts
- 9,039
i know why its not a good idea..
stability
reliability
performace
3 key points all servers should strive to forfill, dsl will never manage that.Matt Wallis
United Communications Limited
High Performance Shared & Reseller | Managed VPS Cloud | Managed Dedicated
UK www.unitedhosting.co.uk | US www.unitedhosting.com | Since 1998.0
-
09-17-2002, 02:08 PM #12A#* Duke Of New York
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Location
- Chicago, IL
- Posts
- 1,953
If you are even thinking of running on dsl, first off, dont even think about adsl, you need sdsl. That right off the bat is atleast 300 dollars a month. Then you need a backup system(no a 30 minute apc wont do it). Also remember that you are going to then a a tier 3 connection, so you will not be near the backbone. You will not have any good fire protection or any great protection of that type. Then lets say things are going decent and its time to upgrade the line. Not many dsl providers go above 1.5 mbits a second on sdsl. I have seen some that can go higher, but thats with a wacky configureation. Finally the dsl TOS. If someone spams through your server or spams and links back to your site. They wont be "understanding" thats its your fault. They will give you a warning or two, then, they will cut you. Want to wait another 30 days for another dsl company to install a line?
I have to say though sdsl has preformed decently in the past. This is NO way in saying its ok to use. But from viewing my own mrtg reports, a sdsl line can easily be saturated to its max consently for a large numbers of hours.
Also there are the startup costs. If you get the hardware, its what, about 800 dollars for the router alone
btw, when I say you, I mean someone whos thinking about doing it.Last edited by davidb; 09-17-2002 at 02:15 PM.
Chicago Electronic Cigarettes: Tobacco Free, Smoke Free. 3 E-Cig Models, 11 flavors, and accessories.
http://www.chicago-ecigs.com0
-
09-17-2002, 02:28 PM #13Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Posts
- 929
My cable modem with windows 2000 server is more reliable than a good proportion of the webhosts at WHT. And more it's free!
0
-
09-17-2002, 05:44 PM #14Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- Louisiana
- Posts
- 396
Originally posted by The Laughing Cow
My cable modem with windows 2000 server is more reliable than a good proportion of the webhosts at WHT. And more it's free!
i see these start up web hosts saying they are gonna start web hosting on a home cable modem - give me a break. an SDSL line would be good if you hosted 1 high traffic site0
-
09-17-2002, 06:18 PM #15Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2001
- Posts
- 889
Originally posted by The Laughing Cow
My cable modem with windows 2000 server is more reliable than a good proportion of the webhosts at WHT. And more it's free!0
-
09-17-2002, 06:20 PM #16Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Posts
- 929
No,
My point was....
I see these start up web hosts saying they are gonna start web hosting on <insert name of $99 dedicated company> or <insert name of cheap reseller> - give me a break. They either use crappy networks or don't know how to administer a server.
With my home server which hosts one website for me off a 512k Cable modem line I know that it is configured with security and performance in mind. I know that it is configured correctly too. I can install whatever componants I want too. Besides the site only gets a couple of hits a day yet I was making a point.
0
-
09-17-2002, 06:29 PM #17WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Sep 2000
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 162
Compressing the image?
Originally posted by ffeingol
Well it's just not a good idea because most DSL/Cable providers forbid you from setting up servers in thier TOS.
Frank
Use GIF if it's a line diagram or something with few colors and you don't want the lines to smudge even a little bit. Use JPG if it's a photo - too many colors / shades and where minute overlaps may not be noticeable.
Sorry if someone has already posted this and this is redundant. I haven't read until the end of the thread.
Wing.0
-
09-17-2002, 06:31 PM #18Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Posts
- 929
I don't pay for the cable, I live with my parents. They fork out the £10/month for 512k cable
0
-
09-17-2002, 06:50 PM #19Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 256
I'll agree that Adsl (which usually has uploads of 300K max on the average) is completely unsuitable for a paid-for service (Unless you have lots of customers whose sites never get hit.)
SDSL should be OK, seeing as 1.5 MBit (without bonding, up to 3MBit with) should handle close the loads the same as a t1 (1.54 I believe?) would.
As for a home cable modem....
Well, you are still limited to a 300K upload.
and the CHIEF problem being--- (Regardless of speeds)
Your service could be Shut Off at ANY time by your ISP if they detect you running a server. Or ports for email, ftp, web, etc could be blocked.
Even WORSE since you dont have a LEGAL RIGHT to "resell" the home connection, YOU are liable if the ISP wants to go after you, and YOUR CUSTOMERS arent legally obligated to pay you.0
-
09-17-2002, 07:02 PM #20Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Location
- MD
- Posts
- 65
its not just having a fast connection at home....You also got to have a way to keep temperature and humidity down. Now that might not be as important because it will probably be rare that a room in your house is too hot, and too humid, but a bigger problem would be power outages and physical protection. What if someone breaks into your house and steals a server. All this stuff is probably uncomman, but sh*t happens and you and your customers would be in a bad situation if any of this happens. But if you want to put your DSL or SDSL to use you could always have your backup/support server there so if your main server goes down customers have a place to look at updates and stuff
0
-
09-17-2002, 07:44 PM #21Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Posts
- 929
That last point is a fairly good one. It would be a cheap, reliable way to do offsite tape backups if you had a fast enough connection.
My ISP permits the use of your own servers as long as they are passworded (in theory). Mine websites are so its fine0
-
09-17-2002, 09:48 PM #22Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Location
- MD
- Posts
- 65
That last point is a fairly good one0
-
09-17-2002, 11:14 PM #23Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 256
Well SDSL is the business class product, and doesnt necessarily go into homes...it CAN but its perfectly appropriate for a business too
0
-
09-18-2002, 12:00 AM #24Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Posts
- 263
SDSL should be fine for non-mission critical hosting. We host a backup server on our SDSL, and I literally can't tell the difference between a normal site hosted off our SDSL, and a site hosted on our main webservers.
Our SDSL provider is great, hardly any downtime at all. We pay over 200 a month for it, but it's very reliable, and we get 100% usage both ways, 24/7.0
-
09-18-2002, 01:02 AM #25Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 256
well, technically I personally don't expect someone with DSL of any type to do anything terribly critical (IE host banking systems for countries) and the like which need multiple direct-to-backbone redundant connections, as well as possibly redundant sites.
But for standard home/business hosting it should be ok.0