Howdy, Stranger!

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


Netcup Special Offer today 33% off VPS recurring! - Page 2
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.

Netcup Special Offer today 33% off VPS recurring!

2

Comments

  • WSS said: My 3G VPS was so slow that I couldn't even get LetsEncrypt to vend me a new certificate because it would timeout. They moved me to a new host, but I've just ignored it since that time because I'm annoyed at them.

    That's really strange and not inline with the experience that I have with them. Sorry to read this.

  • I was a bit surprised, after seeing everyone praising them. Every so often, it happens, and I'll just assume there was some other issue at play. The I/O was abysmal, though. I'll play with it later, since I have actual work to accomplish today.

  • Ive also experienced better woth netcup ;/

  • I am interested in netcup's storage offer but unfortunately I don't speak German, can anyone tell me if storage VPS are also discounted or maybe it is better to wait for Blackfridat for storage offer, as of now I have ZXhost storage 1 year but I am not satisfied and I want to find something else.

  • @marson said:
    I am interested in netcup's storage offer but unfortunately I don't speak German, can anyone tell me if storage VPS are also discounted or maybe it is better to wait for Blackfridat for storage offer, as of now I have ZXhost storage 1 year but I am not satisfied and I want to find something else.

    Storage atleast seems cheaper atm than their regular pricing so I guess it is also discounted.

  • I found some 5 euro vouchers online:

    36nc15103392910
    36nc15103392911
    36nc15103392912
    36nc15103392913
    36nc15103392914
    36nc15103392915
    36nc15103392916
    36nc15103392917
    36nc15103392918
    36nc15103392919
    36nc151033929110
    36nc151033929111
    36nc151033929112
    36nc151033929113
    36nc151033929114
    36nc151033929115
    36nc151033929116
    36nc151033929117
    36nc151033929118
    36nc151033929119
    36nc151033929120
    36nc151033929121
    36nc151033929122
    36nc151033929123
    36nc151033929124
    36nc151033929125
    36nc151033929126
    36nc151033929127
    36nc151033929128
    36nc151033929129

  • @ewrek said:
    I found some 5 euro vouchers online:

    36nc15103392910
    36nc15103392911
    36nc15103392912
    36nc15103392913
    36nc15103392914
    36nc15103392915
    36nc15103392916
    36nc15103392917
    36nc15103392918
    36nc15103392919
    36nc151033929110
    36nc151033929111
    36nc151033929112
    36nc151033929113
    36nc151033929114
    36nc151033929115
    36nc151033929116
    36nc151033929117
    36nc151033929118
    36nc151033929119
    36nc151033929120
    36nc151033929121
    36nc151033929122
    36nc151033929123
    36nc151033929124
    36nc151033929125
    36nc151033929126
    36nc151033929127
    36nc151033929128
    36nc151033929129

    Why not take the ones from @Falzo ?

  • Since being migrated, the system is finally what I'd consider usable, but I still haven't been able to get a LE setup for my new .de, despite testing HTTP/HTTPS and ensuring DNS was all up to date. What the hell.

  • FalzoFalzo Member
    edited November 2017

    @Ympker said:

    @ewrek said:
    I found some 5 euro vouchers online:

    Why not take the ones from @Falzo ?

    there is no need to 'find' them. any customer (like me) can generate them for others as a referral. it's just affiliates, nothing more - so of course he likes everyone to take his coupons rather than mine ;-)

    Thanked by 1Ympker
  • @marson said:
    I am interested in netcup's storage offer but unfortunately I don't speak German, can anyone tell me if storage VPS are also discounted or maybe it is better to wait for Blackfridat for storage offer, as of now I have ZXhost storage 1 year but I am not satisfied and I want to find something else.

    Yes, the storage VPSes are also discounted:

    https://www.netcup.de/vserver/vstorage.php

    I think that these discounted prices are attractive for such KVM storage VPSes (that also have a decent amount of RAM), but if a NAT OpenVZ VPS works for you, you'll probably be able to find cheaper prices elsewhere, especially on Black Friday.

  • @angstrom said:

    @marson said:
    I am interested in netcup's storage offer but unfortunately I don't speak German, can anyone tell me if storage VPS are also discounted or maybe it is better to wait for Blackfridat for storage offer, as of now I have ZXhost storage 1 year but I am not satisfied and I want to find something else.

    Yes, the storage VPSes are also discounted:

    https://www.netcup.de/vserver/vstorage.php

    I think that these discounted prices are attractive for such KVM storage VPSes (that also have a decent amount of RAM), but if a NAT OpenVZ VPS works for you, you'll probably be able to find cheaper prices elsewhere, especially on Black Friday.

    they have been even cheaper during the easter holidays though. I have one 1.5 TB box running for as low as 12€ a month (yearly contract) - so maybe relax and wait for the advent calendar?

    Thanked by 1angstrom
  • vimalwarevimalware Member
    edited November 2017

    @falzo so 4.99/m (on annual) is the discounted price for 3gb/240SAS? looks like it.

    I only regret missing out on that old 640GB-SAS offer a while ago. I guess I'll wait.

  • WSSWSS Member
    edited November 2017

    ... and by breaking it down and renewing the certificates manually; everything's OK again.

    Despite having no issues with resolving domains before- with this 3GB beast, I've ended up setting up dnsmasq as a local caching nameserver so Apache doesn't take 10 seconds to restart. DHCP/etc are disabled, and it's a much lower-resources config than unbound for this simple use.

    On the whole, I've managed to really pare down my overhead (Deb 9 systemd poo-poo):

                  total        used        free      shared  buff/cache   available
    Mem:           2.9G        248M        2.2G         21M        532M        2.5G
    Swap:           6G          0B         6G
    
    Thanked by 1angstrom
  • @vimalware said:
    @falzo so 4.99/m (on annual) is the discounted price for 3gb/240SAS? looks like it.

    I only regret missing out on that old 640GB-SAS offer a while ago. I guess I'll wait.

    That offer was in 2016. I'm not sure that it'll return as such.

  • HostlovinHostlovin Member, Host Rep

    This is one sexy offer

  • For whatever reason, the .win TLD does not like my new NetCup IPv6 space.

  • @WSS said:
    For whatever reason, the .win TLD does not like my new NetCup IPv6 space.

    try .fail

    Thanked by 1ehab
  • It's already a .win TLD, so fail is implied.

    Thanked by 1IncognitoBurrito
  • WSSWSS Member
    edited November 2017

    Anyone else experience strange issues with IPv6 on their VPS-not-rootserver setup?

    The setup is exactly the same on both, but only on the VPS line do I see it adding a timeout to my default gateway (fe80::1), which is out of my own /64 space- with precisely the same KVM setup, albeit with more RAM and disk space.

    This is what you should get from ip -6 route:

    x:y:z:a::/64 dev ens3 proto kernel metric 256  pref medium
    fe80::/64 dev ens3 proto kernel metric 256  pref medium
    default via fe80::1 dev ens3 metric 1024  pref medium
    

    If you see a timeout for your default gateway value set, your system is likely making it a temporary link as the link-local is not within your /64.

    Make sure you disable IPv6 autoconf

    net.ipv6.conf.$IFACE.accept_ra = 0
    net.ipv6.conf.$IFACE.autoconf = 0
    

    This fixed it for me, but I didn't have this problem until they migrated my host to a new node (by request).

    You can also fix this yourself by making your if-up statement similarly- after removing the default route for IPv6;

    ip -6 route add default via fe80::1 dev $IFACE onlink

  • @WSS said:

    Make sure you disable IPv6 autoconf

    net.ipv6.conf.ens3.accept_ra = 0
    net.ipv6.conf.ens3.autoconf = 0
    

    This fixed it for me, but I didn't have this problem until they migrated my host to a new node (by request).

    +1

  • @Falzo said:
    +1

    Do you have any insider info about the actual host nodes? I'm genuinely curious to see why these virtually-indistinguishable KVMs act differently, even with same virtualized interface.

  • No sorry was just about ipv6. Autoconf so far has always been the first thing to turn off... can't why you got two different cups of tea though

  • WSSWSS Member
    edited November 2017

    I just checked, and the VPS are actually root-servers, too. I didn't think it directly correlated since the migration.

    I also got a couple lower-resource nameservers, and that 3GB beast for serving my pointless interweb pages. Since my nameserver TLD is rejecting my netcup IPv6, I assume that may be why it's taking longer to resolve using external nameservers, but running dnsmasq as a cacher on my HTTP/HTTPs VPS took care of that rather quickly.

    I wish I had made up my mind about downsizing before I prepaid for a few months of @Dacentec.

    Thanked by 1Ympker
  • @WSS said: Anyone else experience strange issues with IPv6 on their VPS-not-rootserver setup?

    I wanted to say that I think that you have a Root-Server ...

    WSS said: This is what you should get from ip -6 route:

    x:y:z:a::/64 dev ens3 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium

    fe80::/64 dev ens3 proto kernel metric 256 pref medium
    default via fe80::1 dev ens3 metric 1024 pref medium

    FYI, I have a vServer, and I get the following as the output of ip -6 route:

    a:b:c:d::/64 dev eth0  proto kernel  metric 256  pref medium
    fe80::/64 dev eth0  proto kernel  metric 256  pref medium
    ff00::/8 dev eth0  metric 256  pref medium
    default via fe80::1 dev eth0  proto ra  metric 1024  expires 1587sec hoplimit 64 pref medium
    

    WSS said: Make sure you disable IPv6 autoconf

    I've haven't adjusted IPv6 autoconf explicitly, but I'm pretty sure that it's disabled by default. (I'm running Slackware. :-D )

  • @angstrom said:
    default via fe80::1 dev eth0 proto ra metric 1024 expires 1587sec hoplimit 64 pref medium

    See that?

    Thanked by 1angstrom
  • @WSS said:

    @angstrom said:
    default via fe80::1 dev eth0 proto ra metric 1024 expires 1587sec hoplimit 64 pref medium

    See that?

    Thanks for the heads up -- I wasn't paying sufficient attention earlier.

    ip -6 route now shows:

    a:b:c:d::/64 dev eth0  proto kernel  metric 256  pref medium
    fe80::/64 dev eth0  proto kernel  metric 256  pref medium
    ff00::/8 dev eth0  metric 256  pref medium
    default via fe80::1 dev eth0  metric 1024  pref medium
    

    This is better, no? :-)

    However, after experimenting a bit, I found that I didn't have to mess around with sysctl parameters at all, which I'd prefer not to unless absolutely necessary.

    The following sufficed (the device in my case is eth0):

    ip -6 route del default
    ip -6 route add default via fe80::1 dev eth0
    

    The second line is what you proposed but without onlink (which doesn't seem to be necessary, and I'm not sure what unintended behavior the addition of onlink might have).

    The first line is my contribution, which simply deletes the route implicitly set by the system.

    This seems to work.

  • Neither were you now. I said that the ip route statement addition statement should easily fix the issue at hand. It's still a good idea to disable autoconf, because it's just another Linux TCP stupidity to have enabled by default. ;)

    angstrom said: (which doesn't seem to be necessary, and I'm not sure what unintended behavior the addition of onlink might have).

    onlink is kind of a boolean, which tells you if the subnet is on the same link or not. It's deprecated with networkd (which shouldn't exist).

  • @WSS said: Neither were you now.

    Neither was I what now?

    WSS said: I said that the ip route statement addition statement should easily fix the issue at hand. It's still a good idea to disable autoconf, because it's just another Linux TCP stupidity to have enabled by default. ;)

    Okay, then I misunderstood the logic of your suggestion: I thought that you were saying that both were needed.

    What I didn't say above is that during my experimenting, I found that I couldn't merely add your suggested route add statement (with or without the suggested sysctl parameters). The problem was that this statement alone yielded the error RTNETLINK answers: File exists, and the new route wasn't set as a result. By first deleting the default route, and then applying your route add statement, it worked.

    (It's not that I'm against disabling IPv6 autoconf in principle, but I was just looking for a solution of the smallest intervention necessary for the problem at hand. Thanks again for pointing out the original problem.)

  • WSSWSS Member
    edited November 2017

    @angstrom said:

    @WSS said: Neither were you now.

    Neither was I what now?

    Paying attention.

    @angstrom said:
    What I didn't say above is that during my experimenting, I found that I couldn't merely add your suggested route add statement (with or without the suggested sysctl parameters). The problem was that this statement alone yielded the error RTNETLINK answers: File exists, and the new route wasn't set as a result. By first deleting the default route, and then applying your route add statement, it worked.


    @WSS said:
    You can also fix this yourself by making your if-up statement similarly- after removing the default route for IPv6;

    ip -6 route add default via fe80::1 dev $IFACE onlink

    You need less sugar, and more bran. Glad it worked!

  • @WSS said: You need less sugar, and more bran. Glad it worked!

    Okay, touché, I guess that I really wasn't paying attention! You win this one.

    But by misreading you, I discovered that I didn't need to disable IPv6 autoconf (which I'd prefer not to do). :-)

Sign In or Register to comment.