View Full Version : Datacenter/network operations update 05/03/2005
#1 Abovenet is scheduled to be added to our BGP blend June 1st
#2 We managed to setup up new shelf space for additional 200 servers until the new server room is ready
#3 in order to populate new shelf space we have purchased 200 new servers. Please check out latest server specs and pricing at http://www.fdcservers.net/dedicated.html (http://www.fdcservers.net/dedicated.html)
#4 Reseller area is now %100 operational http://www.fdcservers.net/resellers.php (http://www.fdcservers.net/resellers.php) . Customers with at least 3 dedicated servers in our datacenter may contact sales@fdcservers.net for the login.
#5 The new server room should be ready by the end of June 2005. The new room will have 1000 server capacity. It will accommodate single servers only. There will be no cabinet or rack space available
#6 In order to address recent VDS issues that have occurred on some of the hardware nodes we have ordered 10 new dual Opterons which will help to eliminate over-crowding plus will provide redundancy should a hardware node fail
if you have any questions, feel free to email sales@fdcservers.net
Petr
FDCservers
This is great news. Do you know if this will fix the packetloss that I am getting during the day?
As soul said Great News! :D
mikron15
05-06-2005, 19:42
Soul, i am hoping so.. Once they get the new bw, i hope they divert most traffic away from L3 and leave more bw for the irc segment. As it is , the web segment benefit from the bgp mix.
PoisonDart
05-12-2005, 19:53
If im not mistaken, the IRC segment is getting switched to Abovenet. We are not staying on 3
How did FDC "make more space" for another 200 servers exactly? They arn't being put in a crappy place that's not really cared about, are they? And is it temporary or will they be moved once there's that extra 1000 server space available?
- Shane.
How did FDC "make more space" for another 200 servers exactly? They arn't being put in a crappy place that's not really cared about, are they? And is it temporary or will they be moved once there's that extra 1000 server space available?
- Shane.
The servers live in the hopes and dreams of children everywhere. Or on a printer stand.
The servers live in the hopes and dreams of children everywhere. Or on a printer stand.
Haha. :p.
WOOHOOO we are now on above net No more damn packetloss, i'm some glad fdcservers got abovenet LINES :jumpgrin:
ShannonS
05-31-2005, 15:54
YAHOO i am getting best pings ever!!!
this is from my home pc in oz
Ping statistics for XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:
Packets: Sent = 183, Received = 183, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 229ms, Maximum = 372ms, Average = 235ms
befor this i was getting 280ms!! 50ms less so good :)
plus my hops now are 15 instead of 17!
Thank you fdc for putting in above.net :)
mikron15
05-31-2005, 19:28
Pings for me is a bit high compared to L3. With L3 i used to get 27ms, with abovenet i get 35ms. Do we still have L3 in the bgp mix for irc or they got rid of L3?
As for speed, from the testfile, i used to get 210-280KB/sec with above net i get 75-220Kb/sec ( fluctuates like nuts)
Pings for me is a bit high compared to L3. With L3 i used to get 27ms, with abovenet i get 35ms. Do we still have L3 in the bgp mix for irc or they got rid of L3?
As for speed, from the testfile, i used to get 210-280KB/sec with above net i get 75-220Kb/sec ( fluctuates like nuts)
Still alot of packetloss for me on the L3 segment. :(
Still alot of packetloss for me on the L3 segment. :(
Me too still about 25% packetloss, and my comcast cable plus two servers I have elsewhere get routed through L3 :( .
mikron15
05-31-2005, 20:23
Still alot of packetloss for me on the L3 segment. :(
So i can't complain then. I either be happy with the abovenet i route thru ( slow speeds and a bit high pings ) or better pings and speeds and packet loss with L3 lol
Earlier this morning I was only getting 45 KBps on Level(3)...
Hmm I am being routed trough Cogent Speed is very bad (15KB/sec on my 4 mbit home line :@)
Well as useual im still routed via L3 :( still slow as hell... but hey... ill live :D
MQ-James
06-01-2005, 09:40
yesterday, my co-tech couldn't access some servers in the DC which were getting routed over above.net for me...
Cogent routing here, 15 kB/sec and 30% packet loss.
Called cogent who have confirmed a problem with fdcservers end of things... Submitted ticket and no replu etc... no change or improvement... no answer to telephone calls. Not very impressive.
dustmaker
06-13-2005, 21:44
Same im getting some big speed issues with my dedicated aswell this past days especialy today, they have to reply on my ticket. This is really bad i was getting a 650 kb download from it now im not even reaching a 100 kb/s.
:nuts: Same my box internet speed is like so sh****!! the UPLOAD the DOWNLOAD all screwed UP! WHAT THE F***!? THey said it will be over in a few hours for AboveNet.. This sucks man
Pinging xx.xx.xx.xx with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Reply from xx.xx.xx.xx: bytes=32 time=1194ms TTL=47
Reply from xx.xx.xx.xx: bytes=32 time=1250ms TTL=47
Reply from xx.xx.xx.xx: bytes=32 time=1220ms TTL=47
Ping statistics for xx.xx.xx.xx:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 3, Lost = 1 (25% loss)
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1194ms, Maximum = 1250ms, Average = 1221ms
this is result i got from Abovenet route
psyxakias
06-15-2005, 02:07
You're having high latency possibly due to bad routing/peering from your ISP, not AboveNet/FDC. But anyway, please post a full traceroute (you may use wildcards in your home and your server's IPs).
Currently having 80-90 ms from US cable -> FDC, 180-200 ms from europe -> FDC.
C:\Documents and Settings\BYKTE>tracert 208.53.170.51
Tracing route to science.nasa.gov [208.53.170.51]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 25 ms 11 ms 14 ms 10.26.128.1
3 14 ms 11 ms 29 ms 172.20.26.129
4 13 ms 27 ms 18 ms 172.26.26.1
5 24 ms 23 ms 15 ms 172.20.8.133
6 10 ms 29 ms 9 ms 172.20.8.238
7 14 ms 31 ms 17 ms 61.8.233.53
8 93 ms 45 ms 87 ms ge-0-0-0.r01.sngpsi01.sg.bb.verio.net [61.8.234.
60]
9 221 ms 219 ms 239 ms p1-1-0-0.r81.sttlwa01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.3
.93]
10 222 ms 212 ms 213 ms p16-1-1-1.r20.sttlwa01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.
2.218]
11 223 ms 212 ms 247 ms p16-0-0-0.r03.sttlwa01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.
2.15]
12 237 ms 216 ms 210 ms so-3-3-1.cr1.sea1.us.above.net [64.125.12.29]
13 272 ms 220 ms 226 ms so-0-0-0.cr2.sea1.us.above.net [64.125.28.186]
14 330 ms 259 ms 254 ms so-7-0-0.cr2.ord2.us.above.net [64.125.30.222]
15 263 ms 263 ms 275 ms so-0-0-0.cr1.ord2.us.above.net [64.125.29.185]
16 262 ms 339 ms 265 ms fdc-above.us.mfnx.net [64.124.50.210]
17 260 ms 278 ms 277 ms 208.53.170.80
18 1014 ms 1209 ms 980 ms science.nasa.gov [208.53.170.51]
Trace complete.
C:\Documents and Settings\BYKTE>
so whose fault is it??
definitely not MINE!! others have been complaining slow access to mine also
so dont give me bullshit about it being my fault..
my freaking box upload is less than 100!! and i am on vds#5 and my friends who are having vds#1 has upload so MUCH faster than mine. reaching 1000 over.
others refers to many people from US europe zeeland
to be fair of not being biased i do a traceroute from another US server..
here..
eat it..!
bykte@metawire $ traceroute 208.53.170.51
traceroute to 208.53.170.51 (208.53.170.51), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 66.101.226.1 (66.101.226.1) 1.29 ms 0.886 ms 0.824 ms
2 66.101.224.21 (66.101.224.21) 226.481 ms 170.977 ms 174.76 ms
3 us-alx-va-cso-routerm01.secdog.com (66.101.224.2) 172.879 ms 169.656 ms 1 71.183 ms
4 s216297-1.rtr1.s216297.uswash2-j20c.savvis.net (64.241.143.33) 170.647 ms 188.368 ms 170.862 ms
5 dcr2-so-7-3-0.Washington.savvis.net (206.24.227.21) 182.549 ms 178.561 ms 174.945 ms
6 bcs1-so-5-3-0-500.Washington.savvis.net (204.70.192.158) 170.699 ms bcs2-so -1-0-0-500.Washington.savvis.net (204.70.192.182) 182.506 ms bcs1-so-1-0-0-500. Washington.savvis.net (204.70.192.178) 179.177 ms
7 bcs2-so-2-0-0.NewYork.savvis.net (204.70.192.2) 201.631 ms 178.589 ms bcs1 -so-4-0-0.NewYork.savvis.net (204.70.192.6) 172.642 ms
8 bcs1-so-6-0-0.NewYork.savvis.net (204.70.192.37) 199.891 ms dcr4-so-1-0-0-5 00.NewYork.savvis.net (204.70.192.197) 179.756 ms 197.577 ms
9 dcr4-so-1-0-0-500.NewYork.savvis.net (204.70.192.197) 231.817 ms pos8-0.pr1 .lga1.us.above.net (206.24.195.246) 242.806 ms dcr4-so-1-0-0-500.NewYork.savvis .net (204.70.192.197) 198.730 ms
10 pos8-0.pr1.lga1.us.above.net (206.24.195.246) 200.64 ms so-6-0-0.cr1.lga1.u s.above.net (64.125.27.134) 219.404 ms 191.444 ms
11 so-6-0-0.cr1.lga1.us.above.net (64.125.27.134) 223.883 ms so-3-0-0.cr1.ord2 .us.above.net (64.125.27.169) 173.774 ms so-6-0-0.cr1.lga1.us.above.net (64.125 .27.134) 141.996 ms
12 fdc-above.us.mfnx.net (64.124.50.210) 268.367 ms so-3-0-0.cr1.ord2.us.above .net (64.125.27.169) 165.390 ms fdc-above.us.mfnx.net (64.124.50.210) 196.140 ms
13 fdc-above.us.mfnx.net (64.124.50.210) 147.551 ms 208.53.170.80 (208.53.170. 80) 170.558 ms fdc-above.us.mfnx.net (64.124.50.210) 162.202 ms
14 science.nasa.gov (208.53.170.51) 1006.650 ms 208.53.170.80 (208.53.170.80) 309.314 ms science.nasa.gov (208.53.170.51) 1202.591 ms
still complaining about it being my fault still?
Ping statistics for 67.159.5.x:
Packets: Sent = 717, Received = 717, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 23ms, Maximum = 146ms, Average = 27ms
looks good to me
cos that's ur freaking IP
not mine..
try mine and see..
dont give fake results
freaking shit, each upgrade brings me closer to HELL..
#vds 1 good,very good, #vds2 , hrm..seems ok normal, can take it..vds#5 scrwed up since the start of the plan from vds2 to vds5
helpdesk and even forums of this user keep pushing the blame to me ME ME!!! I AM ME!
Ping statistics for 208.53.170.51:
Packets: Sent = 68, Received = 67, Lost = 1 (1% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 52ms, Maximum = 1320ms, Average = 562ms
ChronoCross
06-15-2005, 02:52
freaking shit, each upgrade brings me closer to HELL..
#vds 1 good,very good, #vds2 , hrm..seems ok normal, can take it..vds#5 scrwed up since the start of the plan from vds2 to vds5
helpdesk and even forums of this user keep pushing the blame to me ME ME!!! I AM ME!
dude stfu. if your too lazy to buy a dedicated and configure it yourself you have no room to bitch. A VDS is shared between multiple people and is not FDC's fault if other people are causing it's connection to max out.
Everyone else's traceroutes are just fine and although sometimes they experience slow speeds the general consensus is that things are getting better as more time passes.
This is like the 8th thread that I have read with you complaining about it and although I have a generally high tolerance of children(yes that's right I'm calling you a child) you have pasesed my breaking point with your ignorance. If there is a problem with the VDS and you have filed a helpdesk complaint then all you can do is wait. It takes more than the 30seconds you expect to find possible causes for a problem that may be but is not limited to
router problems, firewall problems, hardware problems(mobo, ram, network card, HDD's, Settings, etc), bad network cable, unstable power connection. It takes time and there are not enough FDC people to instantly solve all 2000 of it's customers problems instantly.
So please take your whining and stuff it back inside your mouth(hands in this case) and wait it out. and if you want pm me your ip address so that I might traceroute to your server. Being as close as I am to FDC I can generally tell if somethings wrong if my pings and whatnot are high.
Regards,
ChronoCross
psyxakias
06-15-2005, 03:35
bykte, I thought you were saying that the problem is with AboveNet, which is not. It's specifically with your server (VDS?).
I tried to ping you locally from FDC and indeed you're having high latency, which means that it's the server, not the network:--- 208.53.170.51 ping statistics ---
12 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 16% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 740.418/959.599/1161.612/128.539 ms
If you try friendly to discuss the issue with techs at the helpdesk, they'll be able to help you. But with such behavior, nobody blames them if they cannot even understand what's the problem you're having.
Also, I'd like to request you to a) please try to be more friendly. We're all customers over here, trying to help each other and exchange opinions, not to fight, b) don't make multiple posts at once. If you're the last poster and you forgot something to say, you may use the "Edit" button.
ChronoCross, he already gave his IP and I said, I even get 740-1161 ms locally.
ChronoCross
06-15-2005, 04:47
meh psyxakias I realized after I posted that his nasa page was the server.
I did a pretty massive test tonight(while at work) and to me it kinda seems like the server is just under heavy use at times. I sent around 30k ping packets with 0% packetloss and noticed that there were periods of time where the reply was more like 35-45ms for 2-3 minutes and then back to the higher ones so that kinda leads me to believe that the server is just over saturated with users trying to max out the bandwidth. That's my observation.
EDIT: Oh yeah almost forgot a little tibit of information. Something that I've had experiences in the past when my school was installing a new set of rules for the firewall they messed something up and I had 0% packetloss and high pings from outside servers. So that might be something for them to look into. hopefully no one installed a firewall program on the VDS that is making it harder for it to get done.
mrjoshua .. SHUT UP and stop those annoying spam posts ... it really makes you look "cool"
People like FDC even if you dont!
If your going to move to theplanet .. just do it and free us up a few more kb/z bandwidth each :S
mrjoshua .. SHUT UP and stop those annoying spam posts ... it really makes you look "cool"
People like FDC even if you dont!
If your going to move to theplanet .. just do it and free us up a few more kb/z bandwidth each :S
I'm with both! :p. But FDCServers is great value for bandwidth. :).
freaking shit, each upgrade brings me closer to HELL..
#vds 1 good,very good, #vds2 , hrm..seems ok normal, can take it..vds#5 scrwed up since the start of the plan from vds2 to vds5
helpdesk and even forums of this user keep pushing the blame to me ME ME!!! I AM ME!
Urm Wondering who moderates this forum... bykte Chill dude..
mikron15
06-28-2005, 14:17
The mods here are lenient and allow some users to rant about their problem. Only when it gets nasty , an action is taken. If i were a mod, i wouldn't say this guy has crossed the limits yet. But thats just my opinion :)
psyxakias
06-28-2005, 15:02
Indeed some people are becoming unfriendly when they have a problem. I have personally learned that getting pissed off and stop being kind will surely not help on solving the problem. But I will agree with mikron15, as there's a difference between an unfriendly and a real offensive member. When someone is offensive insulting others, mods will take action, even ban him/her if needed.
However you cannot be extremely strict, with members of a forum that belongs to the company they're customers, and start banning them. I've got forced to ban users that either spammed, either started opening insulting threads and I've wildcarded some insulting words but generally extremely strictness doesn't make things better as the customer will simply get more and more angry.
micron isa good user i taught him well lol anyway i used fdc years im very happy with em this stuff happens they do their best for theur customers from my experience and work with them they'll get it fixxed they always have anything i've needed why i send them anyone who asks me where to get a box like micron for example he use to comre on these forums for me we had our boxes linked i wanted him to use fdc i tried many you won;t find anyone better then what you get here
better speeds : Yes
but overall FDC is nice ;)
jalmenaram
06-29-2005, 06:42
Of course fdc is the best server i can get because i get other company the rest company is bad, the best fdc and have the same good staff :).
Congrats
#5 The new server room should be ready by the end of June 2005. The new room will have 1000 server capacity. It will accommodate single servers only. There will be no cabinet or rack space available
If i look at the calender, i see it is "August 30th"
Any news on the new DC .. or (quoting earlier post), will the following line be more acurate:
The servers live in the hopes and dreams of children everywhere. Or on a printer stand.
ChronoCross
09-30-2005, 17:09
Supposed to be Spring 2006 according to a post in another thread by Bummer I believe.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.