1gbit bandwidth

[root]

how much can we push 24/7 on the 1gbit plan

[MQ-James]

on the previous forums bummer said you can get the full gbit in, and about 300mbit out average, but you could probably get more than that. I am not sure, but he stated expected amounts of monthly transfer in TB

[Martin]

From Bummer @ old fdc forum ,


1Gbit unmetered Q&A

Q:Is the bandwidth dedicated ?
A: Not it is not. We offer 1Gbit dedicated for $12000/month

Q:Is the bandwidth oversold ?
A: Yes

Q: What can I expect ?
A: 50TB-100TB/month on average for outbound transfer. 300TB/month for inbound

Q: How is it provisioned ?
A: server with 1Gbit ethernet network card connected directly to our core router

Q: What is the service term
A: month to month.

Q: Is IRC allowed
A: Yes it is upon request


Basicaly this service is intended to raise the bar yet again. When we went public with our 100Mbit unmetered service offer 3 years ago there was lot of bashing and flaming and people said we`d go out of business or that the offer is a scam. Now 3 years later we`ve grown from 10 servers to 1200 and market conditions and falling hardware&bandwidth costs allow us to come up with even crazzier deal.

Not everybody needs 1Gbit unmetered connection. This offer is targeting

#1 media streaming customers
#2 online content distribution customers
#3 customers who deal with large data backups
#4 customers who get charged for DDOS with their current host
#5 customers who are looking to get best $$/Mbit ratio on the market

Main advanatages of this package

#1 no contract. We offer even the 1Gbit unmetered accounts on month to month basis. Please note that other companies will require 1 year commitment, hefty deposits and a setup fee

#2 best price per Mbit ratio on the planet

#3 huge data throughput capability which is especially helpfull in dDOS situations

[Pixie]

One question... say there's 10 servers on the gbit switch (since it says it's shared bandwidth), won't that mean that someone with 300 open upstream connections be able to dominate more of that gbps bandwidth once it's congested than another client who only uses 200 or so connections?

[faqall]

pixie brings up a very good point. as it is not a dedicated line i would find your statement to be somewhat true! however we should wait for an offical response from someone like bummer!!

[punker22]

you guys need to understand how a router/switch works when configured properly and of high quality, say the switch has 1gbit of bandwidth to distribute, it's going to distribute all of that as needed, so if somone is pulling 900mbit and someone else needs 200mbit, well it's going to pull 100mbit off of the person sucking up 900 it will distribute up until the load is 50/50, so technically no one can leech ALL the bandwidth, the router will evenly distribute all of the bandwidth among it's clients, however if it's not all being used you can "burst" up to whatever is free until someone else needs it as well.

[faqall]

very true punker. also need to remember if it is just 1gb there is alot of overhead with tcp/ip :mad:

[punker22]

true as well faq, but i assume that each port is 1gbit and since it's hooked into their core router (which is a cisco 65xx or 76xx if i remember correctly) which has an internal capacity of 720gbit i don't think that should be a problem.

[faqall]

very true. my mind is stuck in private lan mode right now :eek:

[mikron15]

Just outta curiousity..has any1 signed up for that plan?

[faqall]

if i had the money, honestly i would! so much profit could be made off of 300+ TB of bandwidth a month!

[MQ-James]

true as well faq, but i assume that each port is 1gbit and since it's hooked into their core router (which is a cisco 65xx or 76xx if i remember correctly) which has an internal capacity of 720gbit i don't think that should be a problem.

720gbit is alot of bandwidth, you have to ask yourself, what goodwill these routers be by the time 720gbit internal transfer is the norm? the LINX exchange in london uses 50gbit/s and thats a major exchange. 720gbit isa pointlessly high amount inmy opinion.

[ChronoCross]

720gbit is alot of bandwidth, you have to ask yourself, what goodwill these routers be by the time 720gbit internal transfer is the norm? the LINX exchange in london uses 50gbit/s and thats a major exchange. 720gbit isa pointlessly high amount inmy opinion.

never too soon to plan for the future. I can't wait for the day I can have a gigabit connection in my home

[faqall]

i almost doubt that one of fdc's routers will actually hit 720 all at once :). thats just crazy, think about it. also when you think about it, it is rather amazing how a router can handle so many requests at the same time!

[mikron15]

i almost doubt that one of fdc's routers will actually hit 720 all at once :). thats just crazy, think about it. also when you think about it, it is rather amazing how a router can handle so many requests at the same time!
umm..what can i say...Welcome to the digital world of electronics and communications? lol

[root]

well sounds like an idea, i know you can get a 100mbit from congent for $1k
but then you can run mulitple servers etc. thats if you can find a place to pipe it to.

so having somone push 300-400mbit with the server fdc provides is going to be hard to do. it would have to be just for streaming, and that would be pushin the limits.

i guess my question is, if i pushed 600mbit ALL the time would i be capped?

[crax]

It's connected to the core routers. I dont think they can cap you. And yes if i was to buy one of these servers for 999$ on the 1 gig i would have a nice server with about 1TB storage :)

[mikron15]

i guess my question is, if i pushed 600mbit ALL the time would i be capped?
If i am not mistaken, i read bummer posting that they dont have the capability to cap ur server on the gige link. Hope that answers to ur Q

[punker22]

well sounds like an idea, i know you can get a 100mbit from congent for $1k
but then you can run mulitple servers etc. thats if you can find a place to pipe it to.

so having somone push 300-400mbit with the server fdc provides is going to be hard to do. it would have to be just for streaming, and that would be pushin the limits.

i guess my question is, if i pushed 600mbit ALL the time would i be capped?


That 100Mbit for $1k is for home use only, the upstream on it is capped, trust me i was actually going to purchase it.

P.S.

720Gbit is on cisco 76xx models, I know my private cage at another DC is linked into a Foundry Networks NetIron 40G with 1.2Terabits of switching capacity.

[MQ-James]

upload is monitored, as I presume Cogent have more downstream capacity than upstream, or they do not think you will use it as much.

[b4sh]

well sounds like an idea, i know you can get a 100mbit from congent for $1k
but then you can run mulitple servers etc. thats if you can find a place to pipe it to.

so having somone push 300-400mbit with the server fdc provides is going to be hard to do. it would have to be just for streaming, and that would be pushin the limits.

i guess my question is, if i pushed 600mbit ALL the time would i be capped?

come on! you will never hit 600mbit with ONLY one p4 3ghz. its very, i mean VERY hard to do, with more servers even. i'm wondering if someone can reach 150mbit for one day.. its a lot of gigs, a lot of information.. just to BIG people, or for a normal IRC host that get ddosed every day ;)

[MQ-James]

"remember kids, the faster your internet, the bigger your penis" - sums it all up

[b4sh]

"remember kids, the faster your internet, the bigger your penis" - sums it all up

just remmember to use it and dont stay hours and hours on internet :D

[faqall]

i wonder if fdc would allow one to split that connection between more than one box or something like that. say someone purchased dedicated 10mbit bw and wanted to share with 2 servers... think its possible?

[mikron15]

Doubt FDC would do that , as it will be their loss

[faqall]

well provided you paid storage costs or what not. and i ment like colocation on dedicated bandwidth.. but yea, your right

[MQ-James]

I bet FDC would put the gbit in to a switch and allow you to share between servers.

[mikron15]

I do know that, they do allow u to put 2+ servers u rent/own on same switch upon request ..

I would rather have my servers on diff switches tho .. incase of switch failure, I would still have some servers up

[faqall]

I do know that, they do allow u to put 2+ servers u rent/own on same switch upon request ..

I would rather have my servers on diff switches tho .. incase of switch failure, I would still have some servers up

how often does that happen? and when it does id hope they would be on it.

bummer or someone, could you comment on the ability to put more than one box on the same bandwidth?

[MQ-James]

Switch failiure is a rare problem. I have never been affected by a faulty switch.

[boyjunk]

So who has bought a new 1GB box ?? whats it like?

[bummer]

the 1Gbit deal is available per 1 server only

[faqall]

ahh, bummer! hehe one could always upgrade the hardware ;)

[MQ-James]

I got told only hdd/ram are upgradable

[faqall]

awww. that sucks!

[Volantt]

the 1Gbit deal is available per 1 server only

Well that is just a bummer!

[Kalabuchi]

when adding more HDDs, what's the max number of HDD the server can have?

Thanks

[psyxakias]

Kalabuchi, that depends on the motherboard that server has. Most motherboards have 2 IDE channels which allows 2 HDDs on each IDE channel, so maximum 4 HDDs. After that 4 HDDs limit, you can add PCI IDE controllers.. However, you'll have to ask FDC if they are able to do that, unless it's your colocated server so no problems.

Generally, the 1 gbps unmetered offer, looks really good deal to anyone who is interested.

However, I've personally noticed that most (most, not all!) people who ask questions like how many hdds a server can handle, if a PCI controller can be added etc. are usually planning to host a warezdumb with hundred GBs of copyrighted material to participate in a warez group/network.

In such case, I'd strongly recommend you to totally forget it as I doubt FDCservers (or any other serious US DC) will ever allow something like this because it's illegal and further than wasting their bandwidth, they'll be having legal issues. I remember someone complaining badly in WHT forum because FDC cancelled his colocated server and sent it to FBI because he had shipped a server with many HDDs that were totally filled with warez.

[ChronoCross]

so does that mean FDC looks at your HDD's before they hook it up to the network? do they monitor peoples boxes for warez activity? What other measures do they take to ensure no one is pirating warez?

[psyxakias]

ChronoCross, I have no idea.. I never cared to ask as I'm not involved on these stuff. But I suppose they have the right to do any checks they want, as every DC does.

[ChronoCross]

ChronoCross, I have no idea.. I never cared to ask as I'm not involved on these stuff. But I suppose they have the right to do any checks they want, as every DC does.

I'm all in favor of them checking. it means more Bw for legit reasons.

[EricM]

The fastest hard drives can read data from the disk at about 300mbit maximum. For a server the heads on the HD will have to move back and forth as files are requested. Not to mention the load on the server to process so many requests. Its unlikely its possile to do more then 100-150mbit from one server.

[bummer]

The fastest hard drives can read data from the disk at about 300mbit maximum. For a server the heads on the HD will have to move back and forth as files are requested. Not to mention the load on the server to process so many requests. Its unlikely its possile to do more then 100-150mbit from one server.
you might get more if you setup raid. But still even if you pushed "only" 100-150Mbit for $999/month ... who else will give you the same deal ?

[Michael]

Actually, depending on what you're 'pushing'...the drive comment is true..but not so much for machines that push network traffic. Your bottleneck there is the kernel's IP stack.

Of course if you really wanted speed for serving files..load up a box with ram, make a RAM disk, copy files to it..and off ya go. Would be interesting to see how much difference in outgoing bandwidth between a disk or disk array versus a RAM disk. :)

[latefreight]

Dont Forget about a compact flash drive array! That would be wild too, although RAM at the highest speeds on the market could blow away the timings due to the distance from chipset. 0.0001 vs 0.000001 , but then this kind of file server is a very crazy idea like this. seriously in REALITY what is so important that it needs to be on a file server like this format? Its just not economical.

[punker22]

for radio streamers and video streamers this is going to be a hot item since they could push all they want w/o worrying about limits.

[ChronoCross]

for radio streamers and video streamers this is going to be a hot item since they could push all they want w/o worrying about limits.

I think it's only going to be good for people with custom servers. the hardware of a dedicated is good for a webserver but it probably won't be able to handle the needs of a streaming server. now if FDC enabled people with this plan to have customized streaming server designs I think more people would be interested.

[faqall]

i thought we could upgrade the hardware in our dedicated servers... i did

[ChronoCross]

i thought we could upgrade the hardware in our dedicated servers... i did

what did it cost? I mean a streaming server should have some pretty hardcore requirements if you plan on using 300+mbit's of transfer.

at least a Pentium 4 3.2 perhaps even a Xeon or opertron. A Raid 0 would probably be good if you plan on using it for more than just streaming (as I would if I was paying 1k a month).

[syan]

So who has bought a new 1GB box ?? whats it like?

I just got mine setup, going to install my gears and see how it flies... :D

[faqall]

it was a little over the ocst of the hardware. got an amd 64bit 3000+ and a mobo (dont remember the exact cost). wasent thinking when i got it or else it would have been an opti :rolleyes:

[faqall]

I just got mine setup, going to install my gears and see how it flies... :D

NICE :D! Media server of some sort?

[kevin]

only one allowed

[root]

wow if fdc ever looked at my files on my serve that i owned and i coloed.
I would end of sueing them. i would like an answer by fdc if they do look at the files on people servers? first id like to know how they do it.
imagine if the pulled one of my drives on my array and corrupted the data.
this just makes me sick about thinking about this.

i dont host warez, I run various dateing webites. all of my colo server have 4 hds in them in a raid array. does this mean im a pirate NO!

my servers have about 400-600gb each this is because my servers have multiple backups accross arrays. but this isnt fdc concern.

please feel free to post a response fdc then lock this thread. I am not longer interested in your service, unless I am mistaken.

[MQ-James]

I would think they probably check graphs and if they have high bandwidth usage they check what ports have activity, and if they appear to be non standard they may packet sniff to find out what is being send/recieved, but I may be wrong.

[psyxakias]

wow if fdc ever looked at my files on my serve that i owned and i coloed.
I would end of sueing them. i would like an answer by fdc if they do look at the files on people servers? first id like to know how they do it.
imagine if the pulled one of my drives on my array and corrupted the data.
this just makes me sick about thinking about this.

i dont host warez, I run various dateing webites. all of my colo server have 4 hds in them in a raid array. does this mean im a pirate NO!

my servers have about 400-600gb each this is because my servers have multiple backups accross arrays. but this isnt fdc concern.

please feel free to post a response fdc then lock this thread. I am not longer interested in your service, unless I am mistaken.
root, the first person who mentioned about warez/piracy on this thread was me, so I assume that you got upset because of my post(s) and you started saying that you no longer want this service etc.

I was *very* clear that from my experience (that can be mistaken of course), most (*NOT ALL*) that were interested to have several huge HDDs on servers were interested to use them in illegal activities.

It really does not make any sense that you got upset at FDC just because another FDC customer (me) who just expressed his opinion. I wouldn't get upset even if another member in here was telling me that he can burn/explode our servers (because simply, I wouldn't believe him).

Also, If I was worried that much (as you seem to be) then I would prefer to contact FDC's support/sales/owner (support@fdcservers.net, sales@fdcservers.net, petr@fdcservers.net) to receive official response regarding your worries, rather than asking in a public forum.

Anyway, a friendly suggestion from me: "don't freak out that easily" :eek:

[EricM]

Very doubtful they look at what people have on their servers.

ISPs are not legally responsible for their users actions until notified of illegal activity on their network.
There is no legal requirement for an ISP to police its network.

They only have to remove when its reported to them.
Only if they do not remove after being notified they are liable.

In fact if the ISP does police its network they open themselves up for even more risk. Legal precendece has been set that ISPs who are known to police their network are automatically liable.

[root]

root, the first person who mentioned about warez/piracy on this thread was me, so I assume that you got upset because of my post(s) and you started saying that you no longer want this service etc.

I was *very* clear that from my experience (that can be mistaken of course), most (*NOT ALL*) that were interested to have several huge HDDs on servers were interested to use them in illegal activities.

It really does not make any sense that you got upset at FDC just because another FDC customer (me) who just expressed his opinion. I wouldn't get upset even if another member in here was telling me that he can burn/explode our servers (because simply, I wouldn't believe him).

Also, If I was worried that much (as you seem to be) then I would prefer to contact FDC's support/sales/owner (support@fdcservers.net, sales@fdcservers.net, petr@fdcservers.net) to receive official response regarding your worries, rather than asking in a public forum.

Anyway, a friendly suggestion from me: "don't freak out that easily" :eek:
well as your title being administrator i though you talked for fdc
i am so confused

[punker22]

Psy does not speak for FDC, psy is a large colo owner i believe

am i correct psy?

[Abobo]

Psy does not speak for FDC, psy is a large colo owner i believe

am i correct psy?

I think your right, but I must admit it's confusing with him being called an admin.
Wouldn't moderator be better?

[psyxakias]

Sure, I changed my title to "Moderator" ;)

Sorry for the confusion, root.