Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Good hosting down 2 days now.
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Good hosting down 2 days now.

Hello, goodhosting client portal has been not working for 2 days now. Please fix if you know him or know which is new url for portal.

Is there email address available for use for him?

«1

Comments

  • @black said:
    GoodHosting

    You know news?

  • MunMun Member

    what is the address for the portal?

  • seems to be happening a lot lately :/

    Thanked by 3cool_dude Droid W3Host
  • Hello @OP,

    It's actually been down 11 hours now (not 2 days). We're moving our panel and other related services off of OVH's poisoned network; and onto our Chicago network. We experienced a rather annoying attack today that came from OVH's own servers, and they refuse to comment on the issue; so we've chosen to move.

    The DNS records were set to update 2 hours ago, and should propagate within 24 hours. We have multiple DNS servers setup this time (some on Wable, two with Serverian, two with RamNode, etc.) so should not have many repeat problems as we have in recent weeks with DNS failures.

  • @GoodHosting said:
    The DNS records were set to update 2 hours ago, and should propagate within 24 hours. We have multiple DNS servers setup this time (some on Wable, two with Serverian, two with RamNode, etc.) so should not have many repeat problems as we have in recent weeks with DNS failures.

    Looks like it's still pointing to ns1.goodhosting.co and ns2.goodhosting.co. Are you sure you have changed them?

  • What about OVH is poisoned?

    A little iptables magic and you can alleviate this all, forward traffic for your old IP's to your new IP's and things are back online.

    Thanked by 2jar W3Host
  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    MCHPhil said: A little iptables magic and you can alleviate this all

    Not to mention, if you show me a network that OVH servers don't attack I'll do your laundry for a month.

  • @GoodHosting It could be good to inform your clients or/and LET for the move, before you started it, so there were no speculations and people know that their client area will be unreachable at a time window.

  • @jvnadr: True that.

    Transparency, man... Transparency :)

    Thanked by 1noosVPS
  • @DalekOfSkaro said:
    jvnadr: True that.

    Transparency, man... Transparency :)

    Not many here do that (announcements) so its kinda like okay at LE* ;-)

  • wychwych Member

    @noosVPS said:
    Not many here do that (announcements)

    More should :)

    Thanked by 1DalekOfSkaro
  • wych said: More should :)

    Everyone should.

  • @MCHPhil said:
    What about OVH is poisoned?

    A little iptables magic and you can alleviate this all, forward traffic for your old IP's to your new IP's and things are back online.

    It's actually kind of interesting, I had to send thirty notifications to OVH Abuse, as various IPs from their infrastructure at OVH.net were found attacking our panel at OVH Canada.

    More specifically, I had to set the following firewall rules in the OVH firewall; which only lessened the attack:

    1     REFUSE    TCP    46.105.107.96
    2     REFUSE    ICMP   46.105.107.96
    3     REFUSE    IPv4   46.105.107.96
    4     REFUSE    TCP    5.9.30.51
    5     REFUSE    ICMP   5.9.30.51
    6     REFUSE    IPv4   5.9.30.51
    7     REFUSE    TCP    95.211.178.162
    8     REFUSE    ICMP   95.211.178.162
    9     REFUSE    IPv4   95.211.178.162
    

    And for the crap that OVH's firewall can't block (as it simply doesn't have a rule for it), the following had to be implemented on EBTables isolation at the host level:

    SHORE-IN    all   --   46.105.107.96/32    0.0.0.0/0        DROP
    SHORE-IN    all   --   5.9.30.51/32        0.0.0.0/0        DROP
    SHORE-IN    all   --   95.211.178.162/32   0.0.0.0/0        DROP
    

    And finally, in the guest via regular old IPTables

    cP-Firewall-1    DROP    all  --  46.105.107.96    0.0.0.0/0
    cP-Firewall-1    DROP    all  --  5.9.30.51        0.0.0.0/0
    cP-Firewall-1    DROP    all  --  95.211.178.162   0.0.0.0/0
    

    @jvnadr said:
    GoodHosting It could be good to inform your clients or/and LET for the move, before you started it, so there were no speculations and people know that their client area will be unreachable at a time window.

    Sadly it seems we need to notify LET when our employees sneeze. As per our clients, we did send a notification out to our active clients. I'm not sure about OP ever being a client, but considering our mail server was on OVH, fairly few of our clients were able to receive E-Mails at all (go figure.)


    I'm manually configuring all the name servers in our registrar's host management system now, since they have yet to kick over the regular way ("Child Nameserver") . I'll update this thread (since apparently I have to) when the changes have propagated.

  • GoodHosting said: Sadly it seems we need to notify LET when our employees sneeze.

    How about using some DNS Service like CloudFlare for your own website and incorporate StatusPage.io or something :)

    As per our clients, we did send a notification out to our active clients. I'm not sure about OP ever being a client, but considering our mail server was on OVH, fairly few of our clients were able to receive E-Mails at all (go figure.)

    Why don't you use Mandrill or Mailgun to send your client communication emails?

  • GoodHosting said: I'm manually configuring all the name servers in our registrar's host management system now, since they have yet to kick over the regular way ("Child Nameserver") . I'll update this thread (since apparently I have to) when the changes have propagated.

    Anytime you make a change to a nameserver you need to replicate the changes at your registrar. Meaning if you have ns1 on 1.1.1.1 and change it to 1.1.1.2 you need to update your registrar also.

    Welcome to DNS 101.

    I don't know man, I see a lot of nonchalant ness from you about this situation. EVERYONE knows not to use OVH for sending mail, yet you were. It is your fault when someone doesn't get a mail because you actively chose to host your outgoing mail server with OVH. Once again, everyone knows that is a nono. God it should be apparent you should be using some sort of transactional service so you have an amazing record of emails being delivered etc.

    You also posted three IP's. One at OVH FR, Hetzner and Leaseweb... That is not a giant attack from OVH servers... That is one IP sir.

  • GoodHosting said: Sadly it seems we need to notify LET when our employees sneeze. As per our clients, we did send a notification out to our active clients. I'm not sure about OP ever being a client, but considering our mail server was on OVH, fairly few of our clients were able to receive E-Mails at all (go figure.)

    In addition to the knowledge shared above, it'd be a good idea for you to familiarize yourself with PIPEDA:

  • Done.

    goodhosting.co  nameserver = ns1.goodhosting.co.
    goodhosting.co  nameserver = ns2.goodhosting.co.
    goodhosting.co  nameserver = ns3.goodhosting.co.
    goodhosting.co  nameserver = ns4.goodhosting.co.
    goodhosting.co  nameserver = ns5.goodhosting.co.
    goodhosting.co  nameserver = ns6.goodhosting.co.
    goodhosting.co  nameserver = ns7.goodhosting.co.
    goodhosting.co  nameserver = ns8.goodhosting.co.
    
  • GoodHostingGoodHosting Member
    edited August 2014

    @alexh said:

    Why are there more "I don't want to deal with it" paths then there are actual problem solving and correct reporting paths on this diagram? The biggest (what SingleHOP does for every single issue) being "Complaint by Individual" => "Intake" => "Declined to Investigate"

    EDIT Typo'd.

  • GoodHosting said: We have multiple DNS servers setup this time (some on Wable, two with Serverian, two with RamNode, etc.)

    Showing incerno and steadfast. NS1 & NS2 are on steadfast and NS3 - NS8 are on incerno.

  • @MCHPhil said:

    Incerno == Wable . Steadfast is our Chicago cluster (The local ones) . We ended up using the servers from Serverian for backups instead.

    I'm setting up the ones on RamNode now (waiting for cPanel DNSOnly to finish intalling.)

  • How many DNS servers are you planning to have exactly?

  • MCHPhil said: How many DNS servers are you planning to have exactly?

    8 apparently? Maybe Anycast would be a better solution here?

    http://vincent.bernat.im/en/blog/2011-dns-anycast.html

  • @Jack said:
    300

    Seems to be the only way to make LowEndTalk happy. That and, if you check the locations of the DNS servers, each pair is located in a different state.

    ns1 / ns2 - Chicago, Illinois

    ns3 / ns6 - New York, New York

    ns4 / ns7 - Seattle, Washington

    ns5 / ns8 - Dallas, Texas

    Thanked by 1netomx
  • MCHPhilMCHPhil Member
    edited August 2014

    He has 8 already, adding two with ramnode and two with serverian makes 12. YAY I haz add.

    Seems like 8 too many.

    NS1 -> incerno / wable
    NS2 -> steadfast
    NS3 -> ramnode
    NS4 -> serverian

    If you are going to continue with 300 nameservers, I'd definitely suggest spreading them out more. Don't put ns1 and ns2 in same DC. Maybe NS1 and NS8 in same DC.

  • GoodHosting said: Seems to be the only way to make LowEndTalk happy. That and, if you check the locations of the DNS servers, each pair is located in a different state.

    ns1 / ns2 - Chicago, Illinois

    ns3 / ns6 - New York, New York
    ns4 / ns7 - Seattle, Washington
    ns5 / ns8 - Dallas, Texas

    This doesn't make sense. Just assign 4 nameservers then, not 8.

  • MCHPhil said: He has 8 already, adding two with ramnode and two with serverian makes 12. YAY I haz add.

    Can't haz addition, math too challenge, many hard. Read previous post.

    Thanked by 1MCHPhil
  • @alexh said:
    Can't haz addition, math too challenge, many hard. Read previous post.

    Can not agree more, throwing NS at it will not make it better. More complicated yes, but that doesn't equal amazing.

  • On the other hand, having large numbers of servers adds little
    benefit, while adding costs. At the simplest, more servers cause
    packets to be larger, so requiring more bandwidth. This may seem,
    and realistically is, trivial. However there is a limit to the size
    of a DNS packet, and causing that limit to be reached has more
    serious performance implications. It is wise to stay well clear of
    it. More servers also increase the likelihood that one server will
    be misconfigured, or malfunction, without being detected.

    http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2182#section-5

    Thanked by 1MCHPhil
Sign In or Register to comment.