Howdy, Stranger!

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

Advertise on LowEndTalk.com
FRHosting and ChicagoVPS
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

FRHosting and ChicagoVPS

causecause Member
edited December 2012 in Reviews

I placed filtering dns resolver and querystats analyzing scripts on them.
ChicagoVPS LA node is really nice for me. Faster storage and ping to major datacenter.

FRHosting KVM512 promo on node named "Pike"
`--- . ioping statistics ---
20 requests completed in 22116.1 ms
min/avg/max/mdev = 59.9/155.6/406.7/73.9 ms

traceroute to x.ns.gin.ntt.net (129.250.35.250), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 64.111.29.130 (64.111.29.130) 0.411 ms 0.220 ms 0.178 ms
2 te4-1.201.ccr01.cos01.atlas.cogentco.com (38.122.28.17) 58.927 ms 59.359 ms 59.334 ms
3 te4-2.ccr01.den01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.26) 121.746 ms te3-2.ccr02.den01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.18) 183.863 ms te4-2.ccr01.den01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.26) 121.896 ms
4 te0-4-0-2.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.45.50) 14.199 ms te0-3-0-7.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.87.98) 14.195 ms 14.685 ms
5 te0-1-0-2.mpd22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.3.201) 26.694 ms 26.733 ms te0-7-0-33.mpd22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.25.78) 26.353 ms
6 te0-4-0-5.ccr21.ord03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.2.98) 26.608 ms te0-4-0-1.ccr21.ord03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.2.94) 26.757 ms te0-1-0-1.ccr21.ord03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.5.18) 26.599 ms
7 verio.ord03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.12.82) 26.681 ms ntt.ord03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.9.6) 28.859 ms 28.743 ms
8 ae-8.r05.chcgil09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.4.221) 27.272 ms 27.267 ms 27.226 ms
9 x.ns.gin.ntt.net (129.250.35.250) 26.578 ms 26.671 ms 26.654 ms
`

ChicagoVPS Basic promo in LA
`--- . ioping statistics ---
20 requests completed in 19007.0 ms
min/avg/max/mdev = 0.1/0.3/2.6/0.5 ms

traceroute to x.ns.gin.ntt.net (129.250.35.250), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 host.colocrossing.com (198.23.251.2) 0.018 ms 0.007 ms 0.007 ms
2 67.215.251.201.static.quadranet.com (67.215.251.201) 0.356 ms 0.394 ms 0.504 ms
3 96.44.180.41.internal.quadranet.com (96.44.180.41) 0.261 ms 0.316 ms 0.398 ms
4 xe-1-0-2.ar1.lax2.us.nlayer.net (69.31.121.253) 1.263 ms 1.256 ms 1.293 ms
5 ae-7.r04.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (198.173.172.5) 0.758 ms 2.218 ms 2.215 ms
6 ae-3.r05.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.2.221) 0.719 ms 0.762 ms 0.888 ms
7 x.ns.gin.ntt.net (129.250.35.250) 0.207 ms 0.179 ms 0.170 ms
`

Comments

  • What's the purpose of this thread?
    They use different locations, obviously the nearest one will give you better results...

  • InfinityInfinity Member, Provider

    I don't really see how that's a review..

    @yomero said: They use different locations, obviously the nearest one will give you better results...

    Cablestreet - London based ISP - Managed Solutions, Carrier Services, Colocation, Dedicated Servers, VMs, and more..

  • ^ is lost. Really I have no clue what this about. Not to be mean but my mind is blown. I agree Infinity how can this possibly be a review of anything?

    Catch me over at Primary DNS. If you want to chat I am done with this cesspool.

  • Why are you tracerouting to x.ns.gin.ntt.net? What's the significance of this?

  • public dns resolvers of ntt america are widely distributed. the destination of 2 traceroute results have same IP but on different place.

    how far away from major IX is important atleast for me. Sorry for my crazy opinion not useful for you.

  • Your test is too limited. I do check a dozen of location and FRH has similar latency with CVPS (88 vs 70), which is logical, Denver not being Chicago. Also, you should see that FRH has a way better network speed than CVPS, which may not be important for DNS requests but is for anything else.

    183 VPS tested in real time and counting... (86 active LEB providers).
    All links I'm posting are tracked affiliate links, whenever the provider has an affiliate program.
  • @cause said: how far away from major IX is important atleast for me.

    How is it important? I only ask to learn.

  • IMCO,
    If one want to compare 2 datacenter in same region, the distance from IX directly effect their latency because most packets come through major IX.
    For example, @hostingwizard_net said there are about 18ms difference between them. I think this conclusion is not conflict to my test. ChicagoVPS LA node would be located on a few msec from an IX in LA. FRHosting would be 26msec from another IX on CO. (please forgive me 8msec error.)

    Ofcourse my test is limited by which IX is "major" NTT America thought. If you want more reliable data, you have to place probe server on IX which is important for you. Or you can choose any CDN as traceroute/ping target.

    Traceroute from your home may result nearly same conclusion (if you know which hop is the focused IX). But please remember that the response from routers may varied/delayed because most routers do not handle ICMP prior to other more important packets.

    Sorry for my poor Janglish.

Sign In or Register to comment.