Howdy, Stranger!

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


BuyVM Stock - Buffalo?? - Page 5
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.

BuyVM Stock - Buffalo??

1235719

Comments

  • @Francisco said: It's in the works.

    We're working on a .32 beta as we speak. If it goes well, we'll start to slowly roll it out.

    Francisco

    Great to hear. I'd be happy to help test if required. Memory mapping virtual memory fails completely on burst. It made us have to go to KVM/Xen.

  • Thank you for the explanation :)

    I've tried BuyVM before, and as always, the ping is less than 200ms, less than most US provider I've tried

  • Network and hardware is great too

    Thanked by 1Francisco
  • there are still some stock right now. i was able to grab some.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    Yeah I grabbed a 1024 one last night. This one shall be.....sparkleshare.

    Thanked by 1HalfEatenPie
  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran
    edited August 2012

    Someone get mad about stock and DDOS? Stallion and at least 2 of my systems seem inaccessible randomly.

  • @Jack there will be a lot of stock on Monday I guess

  • Hostbluff is also out of stock

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    @jarland said: Someone get mad about stock and DDOS? Stallion and at least 2 of my systems seem inaccessible randomly.

    Thinking it was a route burp since Jack reported the same thing. The nodes he reported as 'offline' didn't go down though.

    Francisco

  • Is there a test ip of your servers in NY to check latency with?
    I got one of your 128MB in SJ and have 180ms from here in europe; still ok but wonder what the difference to NY would be.

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    199.195.255.1 is NY :)

    You can expect to shave about 70 - 100ms off your ping.

    Francisco

  • 64 bytes from 199.195.255.1: icmp_req=1 ttl=44 time=105 ms
    64 bytes from 199.195.255.1: icmp_req=2 ttl=44 time=110 ms
    64 bytes from 199.195.255.1: icmp_req=3 ttl=44 time=105 ms
    64 bytes from 199.195.255.1: icmp_req=4 ttl=44 time=105 ms

    Not really optimal ping for the east coast/NY but i guess thats ok

  • @gsrdgrdghd said: Not really optimal ping for the east coast/NY but i guess thats ok

    In fairness, Buffalo isn't exactly east cost. If you look on a map and have a look at where the submarine cables land, there's still a good 300 or so miles up to Buffalo.

    Personally, I'm surprised I'm getting 90ish pings from Manchester. ;3

    Thanked by 1klikli
  • AlexBarakovAlexBarakov Patron Provider, Veteran
    edited August 2012

    C:\Users\Lost>ping 199.195.255.1

    Pinging 199.195.255.1 with 32 bytes of data:
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=133ms TTL=48
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=126ms TTL=48
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=127ms TTL=48
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=131ms TTL=48
    Ping statistics for 199.195.255.1:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 126ms, Maximum = 133ms, Average = 129ms

    Not bad, from Bulgaria.

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    Rumor is Telia is coming up next week. But given how long it's taking them to get ipv6 done I question that :P

    We'll have IPV6 at lunch either way.

    Francisco

    Thanked by 1klikli
  • AlexBarakovAlexBarakov Patron Provider, Veteran

    @Francisco

    What about filtering in Buffalo? Are you going to route IPs from the node at awknet or ? (if you provide filtering at the new location).

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    @Alex_LiquidHost said: @Francisco

    What about filtering in Buffalo? Are you going to route IPs from the node at awknet or ? (if you provide filtering at the new location).

    I can't backhaul from Awknet, no one would be interested in the service when there might be a 90ms+ penalty in it.

    I have some plans in motion for filtering already, I'll likely hold a public beta period on it when it's ready to go :)

    Francisco

  • AlexBarakovAlexBarakov Patron Provider, Veteran
    edited August 2012

    @Francisco said: I can't backhaul from Awknet, no one would be interested in the service when there might be a 90ms+ penalty in it.

    I have some plans in motion for filtering already, I'll likely hold a public beta period on it when it's ready to go :)

    Francisco

    Sounds good. Well, actually there might be people interested in 90ms+ in addition, if they get ddos protection, dunno though. Personally my filtering system infront my main site adds around 80ms in addition (if only awknet bothered to respond to my quote request), but at the end, better like that instead of getting ddosed on daily basis.

    Anyway, will be waiting on updates on this. Not like I will even use it.. But I just really liked the idea of the filtered IPs and became client once you started offering them.

  • AlexBarakovAlexBarakov Patron Provider, Veteran

    @Jack said: Hahaha! , Don't be silly..

    Yup, thougth so as well. But hey, I am persistent - i keep emailing them 1 time per 2 weeks, even did from my personal email. Tried callign some numbers as well... I will eventually give up.

  • C:\Users\Donna>ping 199.195.255.1
    
    Pinging 199.195.255.1 with 32 bytes of data:
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=56
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=56
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=56
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=56
    
    Ping statistics for 199.195.255.1:
        Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
        Minimum = 37ms, Maximum = 51ms, Average = 40ms
    

    Not bad, I want one!

  • connercgconnercg Member
    edited August 2012

    WV - (West Virginia, USA)

    I get the same to IPXCORE, I just want a pair of matched 128MB Pony's. One on each coast. :D

  • bamnaelbamnael Member
    edited August 2012

    Got this for NY from here in germany:
    Minimum = 122ms, Maximum = 209ms, Average = 140ms
    Interestingly, when I look at the ping -t it got lots of pings with ~130 and then ones with 180-200+ every few seconds.

    For my SJ server I get
    Minimum = 175ms, Maximum = 262ms, Average = 187ms
    Also with spikes like every second at around 250.
    Is this normal?

    Btw, could I/you change my server from SJ to NY when the new ones come please (you can erase my old server with all the data on it, no need to transfer stuff)?
    At the moment my /proc/cpuinfo shows Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU L5520 @ 2.27GHz - the new ones are same/better performance I suppose?

  • @bamnael said: Btw, could I/you change my server from SJ to NY when the new ones come please (you can erase my old server with all the data on it, no need to transfer stuff)?

    You'd have to order a new server in NY, migrate, cancel SJ. We aren't doing migrations for people due to the time involved. Any cancellations you put in you'll get a credit for the time left over (assuming you pick an immediate cancel). Source: Frantech twitter.

  • u4iau4ia Member
    C:\Users\u4>ping 199.195.255.1
    
    Pinging 199.195.255.1 with 32 bytes of data:
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=86ms TTL=53
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=82ms TTL=53
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=85ms TTL=53
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=86ms TTL=53
    
    Ping statistics for 199.195.255.1:
        Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
        Minimum = 82ms, Maximum = 86ms, Average = 84ms
    
    C:\Users\u4>tracert 199.195.255.1
    
    Tracing route to 199.195.255.1 over a maximum of 30 hops
    
      1     3 ms     3 ms     3 ms  unknown [192.168.3.1]
      2    30 ms    30 ms    30 ms  10.25.3.1
      3    29 ms    29 ms    29 ms  at-2-3-0-1712.BING-CORE-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.194.64]
      4    30 ms    29 ms    29 ms  ge-2-1-1-0.BING-CORE-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.18.164]
      5    47 ms    47 ms    48 ms  so-7-2-1-0.NY5030-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.20.98]
      6    49 ms    57 ms    47 ms  0.xe-3-1-0.BR3.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.2.81]
      7    89 ms    76 ms    78 ms  te-7-3-0.edge2.NewYork2.level3.net [4.68.111.137]
      8   108 ms   121 ms    83 ms  vlan52.ebr2.NewYork2.Level3.net [4.69.138.254]
      9    63 ms   142 ms    65 ms  ae-6-6.ebr2.NewYork1.Level3.net [4.69.141.21]
     10   160 ms   122 ms    83 ms  ae-4-4.car2.Buffalo1.Level3.net [4.69.140.241]
     11    57 ms   141 ms    55 ms  ae-11-11.car1.Buffalo1.Level3.net [4.69.140.237]
     12   174 ms    80 ms   123 ms  CWIE-LLC.car1.Buffalo1.Level3.net [4.28.232.90]
     13   112 ms    88 ms    85 ms  199.195.255.1
    
    Trace complete.
    

    This is from only ~90 miles away. :(

  • I'm averaging around 40ms from around 60 kilometers north of Toronto, through Chicago L3 to Buffalo. The times are erratic though. It'll bounce around between 70 and 30.

  • flam316flam316 Member
    edited August 2012

    `Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]
    Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

    C:\Users\Adam>ping 199.195.255.1

    Pinging 199.195.255.1 with 32 bytes of data:
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=50
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=50
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=50
    Reply from 199.195.255.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=50

    Ping statistics for 199.195.255.1:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 20ms, Maximum = 22ms, Average = 21ms`

    Nice.

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    Once Telia is in we'll see how things go. L3 is kinda derpy it seems and sometimes routes things through chicago.

    Francisco

  • u4iau4ia Member

    @Francisco I actually got a faster ping time when it was going through Chicago.

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    @u4ia said: @Francisco I actually got a faster ping time when it was going through Chicago.

    Telia's US network is alright, nothing to write home about.

    Their EU network is one of the best though :)

    Francisco

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    @bamnael said: At the moment my /proc/cpuinfo shows Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU L5520 @ 2.27GHz - the new ones are same/better performance I suppose?

    OpenVZ's are getting E5 2630L's minus a few 128MB's that'll get (E|L) 5520's. We're not migrating anyone as it's a headache if they want to mgirate more than once.

    Francisco

Sign In or Register to comment.