View Full Version : Slow speed again
hmorneau
07-06-2005, 22:30
Hello,
I'm on a dedicated server, and the speed slow down again, about 40k/sec from europe and 60k/sec from canada and 60k/sec from US.
It's a dedicated server.
Im doen about 250-300... its really jumpy.. not to steady.. do you have any test files we can try
hmorneau
07-06-2005, 22:51
newton.hmorneau.com/testfile.zip (http://newton.hmorneau.com/testfile.zip)
jalmenaram
07-06-2005, 23:18
From where u testing ur server dedicated and what is ur ip and maybe i can check from here
Regards
Jose Almenara Amico
I am getting 320K/s from that file . Not bad considering you`re on 5Mbit plan
hmorneau
07-06-2005, 23:55
bummer, I'm not on a 5mbits plan, but a 100mbits plan... but it's true, the speed have now increase... up and down.. we stay on rail ;)
bummer, I'm not on a 5mbits plan, but a 100mbits plan... but it's true, the speed have now increase... up and down.. we stay on rail ;)
Pinging newton.hmorneau.com [208.53.138.88]
IPs with 208.53.138.xxx are 5Mbit customers
hmorneau
07-07-2005, 00:04
Ok, Anyway, the speed is better now... And with a 5 mbits, do you monitor our server ? (for bandwidth abuse?)
we monitor all switch ports
hmorneau
07-07-2005, 00:06
So, why you claim "Unmetered transfer"?
because you don`t get charged any overage fees regardless of your usage. Since the bandwidth is shared and uncapped it can be potentialy abused which is why the ports are monitored.
hmorneau
07-07-2005, 00:16
so it's meatered, but no extra charge, you just get capped. You permit 5000go/month, it's large, but if you exceed, you are capped to 10mbits who permit only 3000go/month... So you authorize 5000go but you can only push 3000go... that don't make sense... Poor you if you get capped..
Well first of all I am not sure why you signed up with FDC if you don`t like the policy
Second the bandwidth is not metered. We never
-charge any overage fees
- we never emailed anybody saying you reached 5000GB limit your account is getting capped
Our bandwidth terms in our terms of service are very upfront and they are there to protect our company and our customers from abuse that may have impact on the network.
Every datacenter monitors their switch ports to monitor the network activity, there is nothing unusual about it.
we never emailed anybody saying you reached 5000GB limit your account is getting capped
I had way less then 5000gb and I was once accidentaly capped, they didnt tell me its true, had to find out myself.. afterwards they figured out it was a mistake and removed the limit.... still FDC´s behavior was really weird (not saying a word about the cap..)
P.S. : 80kb/s of maximum 500kb/s from the testfile posted above..
Also.. When is abovenet coming back? :(
Cogent only is a pain....
mikron15
07-07-2005, 06:52
390 KB/sec on avg on my 10 Mbps cable line at 1:51am EST. Jumpy between 310-460KB/sec
As for Abovenet, as bummer stated , by Aug.. if they feel its stable during the testing month ( July)
And we should live with theses issues? :(
No, you don't have to deal with these issues if you don't mind moving server companies. Let's face it. FDC isn't going to get better unless they cap the servers at a certain transfer rate per second, and develop plans that customers subscribe to and pay fees for, for example a 10Mbps plan, a 20 Mbps plan, and whatever else. By leaving everyone completely uncapped, the network gets bogged down by the load and everyone on the network suffers.
It's like pushing a huge hose through a hole only barely big enough to fit through it and then pushing a smaller hose through and expecting it to go through as fast and as easily as the bigger hose did. It won't happen. You'll scrape the sides of the hole with both hoses, and both will slow down. The only way to get stable bandwidth is to make use of throttles and QoS monitoring, technology any data centre with any hopes of making it in todays Internet age should have.
ChronoCross
07-09-2005, 05:18
newton.hmorneau.com/testfile.zip (http://newton.hmorneau.com/testfile.zip)
5mbit plan? bummer are you sure? I was getting the following:
http://chronocrossdev.com/images/speedtest.PNG
EDIT: btw this pick pretty much blows away the guys suspicion of slow speeds. if I'm getting 60Mbit off his server it's definitely not a problem at FDC.
jalmenaram
07-09-2005, 05:54
I love FDC, i am very happy with this company and services i get from FDC
Regards
Jose Almenara Amico
Jalmenaram: you're a parent or a friend of Moderator/Admin? :D
ShannonS
07-09-2005, 11:34
Jalmenaram: you're a parent or a friend of Moderator/Admin? :D
not everyone dislikes FDC we are happy FdC clients too
Yes, if problems of last 2 months will be fixed I'll be happy to stay with FDC... ;)
I do not understand why peps have to cry all the time about nothing. ur paying barley anythign for these dedicated boxes and they expect 10 meg speeds 24/7. For the peps that want 10 meg speeds 24/7 go rent ur own dedicated unmetered uncapped 100mbit and see what u pay! U would have to Re morgage ur home to get the line for a month. Far as i'm concerned FDC is the best place on the planet. And for all u lammers that like to complain GO else where and see what u get.
here i found a cheap one
$2,995 Monthly, $399 setup
Intel Dual Xeon 2.4Ghz
2x80GB Hard Drives
1024MB RAM
100Mbps Unmetered
do u think u guys can afford that a month huh? not even burstable bandwith hahaha
try to get a t1 line piped into ur home for the same price that fdc offers i bet ya u'll be paying anywheres from 300$ to 500$ a month for a t1 line thats not counting setup fees and u only get anywheres from 1.5 mbit to 3.0 mbit for that price .. Laughs
jalmenaram
07-09-2005, 14:39
i am not parent, but i dont understand this for the customer, in the first opportunities i get this problem (only one) but when i talk with support this resolved this problem and explain what happend. I get lactancy but fdc explain and said me add more B/W and no problem i am happy maybe the customer try to understand this and peace and love
Regards
Jose Almenara Amico
jalmenaram
07-09-2005, 14:42
And i get a lot of server in this live from 4 years and the old company i recieved problem but with fdc dont get problems the rest of company suck, FDC rlz
Regards
Jose Almenara Amico
mikron15
07-09-2005, 15:57
I do not understand why peps have to cry all the time about nothing. ur paying barley anythign for these dedicated boxes and they expect 10 meg speeds 24/7. For the peps that want 10 meg speeds 24/7 go rent ur own dedicated unmetered uncapped 100mbit and see what u pay! U would have to Re morgage ur home to get the line for a month. Far as i'm concerned FDC is the best place on the planet. And for all u lammers that like to complain GO else where and see what u get.
What u stated was true months or years back. With the fall in bw prices, fdc prices are close to some decent dedicated bw price offered elsewhere. For example, there are companies that offer 30 Mbps dedicated server for around $260/mo, 10 Mbps for roughly $190-$200, or a 20 Mbps plans such as :
Dual Xeon 2.4Ghz
2GB Ram DDR
2 x 200GB HD
20 Mbps bandwidth
13 Vlan Ips
Cpanel Included
CentOs / Windows 2003
$200/mo
The port speed is 100mbps with 20mbps on 95th. but we can cap it at 20mbps by request. The mix is HE/AboveNET/XO
while FDC ded plans are about $190-$210/mo
The above are just quotes being advertised in today market.
Now where FDc takes the lead is the burstable bw i.e 20+ Mbps and unlimited ips for IRC.
Now if we are dealing with 100Mbps unmtered bw, then its a diff case, but 60-70% of ppl don't need that much. So if u peeps needs some quality bw less than 20 Mbps, there are places out there that offer it. For those who need those high end bursts , FDC is the place.
I will agreee with u to some extent on the part everyday ppl are opening new threads complaining about same issues. Frankly , my advice to all u peeps, opening all those new threads wont "voice" ur complain. FDc knows abt it and are dealing with it. Like Petr stated, additional transit is/was to arrive this week. And hopefully Abovenet will resume by Aug
i am not parent, but i dont understand this for the customer, in the first opportunities i get this problem (only one) but when i talk with support this resolved this problem and explain what happend. I get lactancy but fdc explain and said me add more B/W and no problem i am happy maybe the customer try to understand this and peace and love
Regards
Jose Almenara Amico
I have bought over 10 servers with fdc, i am 100% satsfied with what they do. sometimes i transfer files from one server to another and use maybe 60-80mbit bandwith and i am able to pull that much, which means FDC do have the bandwith available.
Its not oversold.... (not yet)
And sometimes yes issues like this appear.. and am happy to wait, i havn't found any better company than FDC for my need.... and am happy to stay with them.
Chrysalis
07-09-2005, 16:17
I got 90kB, in UK its to be expected since cogent peering to EU is very poor.
Nero if you transfer from one to another server its internal network the bandwidth is no internet traffic.
mikron15
07-10-2005, 06:32
lol, jahizzo is right. Infact FDC would prefer such transfers as its internally and doesn't cost them using the bw from their transit provider ( altho they buy at bulk and at a commit). The term is LAN traffic, same you would do within ur home network setup, transfering form 1 pc to another.
johan_hammy
07-13-2005, 03:30
I do not understand why peps have to cry all the time about nothing. ur paying barley anythign for these dedicated boxes and they expect 10 meg speeds 24/7. For the peps that want 10 meg speeds 24/7 go rent ur own dedicated unmetered uncapped 100mbit and see what u pay! U would have to Re morgage ur home to get the line for a month. Far as i'm concerned FDC is the best place on the planet. And for all u lammers that like to complain GO else where and see what u get.
FDC's pricing isn't that radically better than the competition, just enough to put them near the bottom. Trust me, I know what bandwidth costs.
johan_hammy
07-13-2005, 03:32
here i found a cheap one
$2,995 Monthly, $399 setup
Intel Dual Xeon 2.4Ghz
2x80GB Hard Drives
1024MB RAM
100Mbps Unmetered
do u think u guys can afford that a month huh? not even burstable bandwith hahaha
try to get a t1 line piped into ur home for the same price that fdc offers i bet ya u'll be paying anywheres from 300$ to 500$ a month for a t1 line thats not counting setup fees and u only get anywheres from 1.5 mbit to 3.0 mbit for that price .. Laughs
You can probably find that $1k cheaper other places. I can find a $400/month server that has low specs and low bandwidth, but that doesn't mean that's par for the course.
johan_hammy
07-13-2005, 03:34
I got 90kB, in UK its to be expected since cogent peering to EU is very poor.
Depends on the network. On France Telecom it could be pretty poor, but Cogent does have a fairly extensive network in the EU.
you people are wrong.. i have another server in europe with completely free traffic, also 100mbit, and : its even cheaper then fdc but its not us located :)
and i know of atleast 4-5 hosters who sell shared unlimited dedi comparable to what FDC does...
Thats why i already moved servers from here, but i will keep other ones at FDC also, still great company.
Chrysalis
07-13-2005, 15:09
Depends on the network. On France Telecom it could be pretty poor, but Cogent does have a fairly extensive network in the EU.
Dont be surprised if cogent leave europe soon their 2 biggets peers depeered them 2 months ago and the network is not what I would call extensive for example traffic over cogent from germany to uk has to go via new york.
johan_hammy
07-13-2005, 16:10
http://www.cogentco.com/htdocs/map.php
Looks fairly extensive. I said their network is extensive, not their peering (which is Cogent's main problem).
Their their M&A strategy, it appears as that's helping their peering case quite a bit. With enough network growth (if it wasn't already), it would be foolish to depeer with a network of that size.
Who were the two that depeered Cogent? I know France Telecom was one (hence traceroutes now going through Verio).
Chrysalis
07-14-2005, 21:50
Looking at that map only one route from us direct to uk(if that fails big trouble), no presence in manchester uk which many big providers have, and weak presence in holland. The whole of north west europe looks weak.
johan_hammy
07-14-2005, 23:00
Looking at that map only one route from us direct to uk(if that fails big trouble), no presence in manchester uk which many big providers have, and weak presence in holland. The whole of north west europe looks weak.
Yeah, but having diverse landings is a good thing as to reduce the likelihood of a failure taking out multiple routes, granted I don't know where the physical fiber paths are.
I don't remember anyone off the top of my head to check for other UK routes, but there's really not anyone with a larger presense than Cogent in the UK (except the ILECs).
Chrysalis
07-15-2005, 04:59
I think you will find abovenet and Level3 for starters both have better routes to uk and peering, they may have less peers but they are quality peers and results speak.
In terms of transfer speeds the top providers get 500kB per thread I have seen some cogent transfers go as low as 125kB per thread over the atlantic sometimes peaking at 250kB, so yes I do find it annoying when people tell me and other europeans that cogent is all fine and dandy and we should sit down and pretend we wrong, but if cogent have so much fiber in uk is it unlit? or just poorly managed?
johan_hammy
07-15-2005, 13:45
It should all be lit and ready to go, they just might not have the trans-atlantic capacity (which is increasing by 2x OC-192s and an OC-48) or again the poor peering (saturated links, not enough peering locations when peered, or not peered at all).
http://www.fixedorbit.com/stats.htm
Level(3) clearly has more routes, but while AboveNet has fewer both networks are of better quality.
It should all be lit and ready to go, they just might not have the trans-atlantic capacity (which is increasing by 2x OC-192s and an OC-48) or again the poor peering (saturated links, not enough peering locations when peered, or not peered at all).
http://www.fixedorbit.com/stats.htm
Level(3) clearly has more routes, but while AboveNet has fewer both networks are of better quality.
what good is the peering if ABOVENET can`t keep stable uptime
johan_hammy
07-15-2005, 15:27
FDC is the only network I've heard of having problems this extensive.
Bummer, this is a bit off-topic but does Qwest have any presence in your building? I hear on 2+gig commits they are very close to Cogent pricing. I'm not sure how good their network is these days but it could be another option.
Bummer, this is a bit off-topic but does Qwest have any presence in your building? I hear on 2+gig commits they are very close to Cogent pricing. I'm not sure how good their network is these days but it could be another option.
yes Qwest is in the building but it really depends what do you call "close to Cogent pricing"
I talk to Qwest sales rep couple times a year but their pricing was never really attractive
FDC is the only network I've heard of having problems this extensive.
well obviously there is a problem with the connection between us and the abovenet. I wasn`t reffering to their network.
But the bottom line is the fiber to our facility is theirs and it is their responsibility to find the problem and fix the problem which they haven`t done.
Their staff seems very professional and the turn up time of was quick and flawless compared to XO or Yipes
What about Global Crossing, AT&T or Savvis bummer? Reach.com would be good, hehe. :p. My ISP owns part of Reach and it's my link to the USA from Australia. :p.
At the moment:
Tracing route to mail.web.fdcservers.net [66.90.66.135] with TTL of 32:
1 0ms 0ms 0ms UBUNTU [192.168.1.2]
2 8ms 7ms 11ms 10.142.64.1
3 7ms 11ms 8ms 61.9.207.195
4 8ms 11ms 8ms CPE-61-9-195-3.nsw.bigpond.net.au [61.9.195.3]
5 8ms 7ms 18ms GigabitEthernet2-1.chw38.Sydney.telstra.net [139.130.35
.9]
6 7ms 18ms 8ms GigabitEthernet14-0.chw-core2.Sydney.telstra.net [203.5
0.20.129]
7 8ms 9ms 7ms 10GigabitEthernet1-0.oxf-core1.Sydney.telstra.net [203.
50.6.2]
8 10ms 7ms 7ms 10GigabitEthernet2-2.syd-core03.Sydney.net.reach.com [2
03.50.13.30]
9 8ms 10ms 10ms i-6-0.syd-core01.net.reach.com [202.84.249.13]
10 189ms 190ms 190ms i-1-5.tmhstcbr01.net.reach.com [202.84.143.209]
11 158ms 158ms 164ms i-4-2.wil03.net.reach.com [202.84.251.194]
12 183ms 183ms 188ms unassign.net.reach.com [134.159.63.66]
13 187ms 199ms 183ms p6-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.2.209]
14 187ms 187ms 186ms p5-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.78]
15 216ms 213ms 202ms p6-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.5]
16 223ms 228ms 218ms p13-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.106]
17 213ms 213ms 214ms p5-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.34]
18 217ms 216ms 217ms g0-1.na21.b000268-0.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.6.1
4]
19 233ms 233ms 236ms FDCServers.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.4.98]
20 233ms 230ms 234ms mail.web.fdcservers.net [66.90.66.135]
Traceroute complete.
Looks like once you hit reach your pings turn to hell. I don't think having reach would do any good for your connection to fdc servers. I would say if you took the reach out of the equation there... that your connection to fdc would be about 30 to 40 ms.
Looks like once you hit reach your pings turn to hell. I don't think having reach would do any good for your connection to fdc servers. I would say if you took the reach out of the equation there... that your connection to fdc would be about 30 to 40 ms.
Do you relize the location of them routers in the hops? Look closely.
Hop #9 is my last hop before it leaves the country which is in Sydney, NSW, Australia then it goes overseas to Hop #10 at the west coast of USA somewhere. That's why the pings look bad, but really it's very good...
I get < 10 ms to any server/router in Sydney city though :).
johan_hammy
07-16-2005, 12:35
What about Global Crossing, AT&T or Savvis bummer? Reach.com would be good, hehe. :p. My ISP owns part of Reach and it's my link to the USA from Australia. :p.
At the moment:
AT&T: not gonna be cheap, no less than $35/mbit at 100 megs (Cogent is at $15), and from what I hear, AT&T pricing doesn't scale well.
GLBX: haven't gotten a quote from them in a long time if ever.
Savvis: $25/meg at 100 megs.
Reach: There are larger carriers that would be better suited for Asian connectivity
Chrysalis
07-16-2005, 21:10
well as johan_hammy says abovenet in general I think are quite stable but FDC seem to have had a bad experience with them, I dont know anyone else who can come close to cogent pricing but perhaps fdc might look at a provider that they just use for european users or anywhere else that cogent struggles with, the old provider williams that used to be used what is their pricing like?
johan_hammy
07-17-2005, 13:57
The last quote I have is from 10 months ago, but at 100 megs it was $45/meg (higher than what I can get L3, AT&T, MCI, etc. for, but this is direct, not through a reseller).
if/when abovenet does become stable, are we going to be able to setup static routes?
ie, have 3 routers: one bgp, one cogent and one abovenet which we can send traffic to, obviously the default would be bgp but being able to statically route certain ip's would be nice for us european customers.... i remember when yipes and cogent were both on seperate ip's... i was getting far better speeds from cogent from europe so statically routed all my connections via cogent and left the default route as yipes.
from using easynews.com's bgp/route selector, bgp hardly ever ends up routing you along the fastest/best route to get to europe.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.