Linode Nextgen: The Network

Post by beachstartup » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 1:05 AM UTC

zaius wrote: post #126

beachstartup wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is because when an IP is blacklisted it's generally done in a contiguous block (subnet) that are probably shared by hosts on the same virtual lan (vlan). this is to prevent mailers from jumping to another ip on the same subnet. trunking an additional vlan into their virtual pool just for you would have constituted a major production change in probably 2 or 3 core switch layers. the operational risk and expenditu…

Interesting to know. I know nothing about the admin side of datacenters. It was a whole subnet that was blacklisted. That said, they offered me a new IP from a couple different subnets as replacement, so I don't think it was too hard for them to do it. They would let me have an extra IP, but wouldn't let me run the two IPs concurrently for more than 24 hours. This was especially frustrating since the subnet was black…

Post by ceol » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 1:30 AM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #86

taligent wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err. Linode has pretty average performance compared to the SSD providers. And during my time as a customer Linode was the worst out of all the VPS I had ever tried up until that point. Constant outages at Fremont and heard about the same at London DC as well.

You mean the SSD providers who cost many times more than Linode? I've tried a few SSD-based instances. Storm is pretty good, but considerably more expensive. Cleverkite and Digital Ocean are both far worse. I wouldn't trust any valuable infrastructure to a provider who offers fast I/O on a crippled network, or who only lets you do fast I/O for a couple of seconds before your instance gets throttled into oblivion, eve…

Post by vertis » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 2:08 AM UTC

Post by MertsA » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 2:21 AM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #86

taligent wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err. Linode has pretty average performance compared to the SSD providers. And during my time as a customer Linode was the worst out of all the VPS I had ever tried up until that point. Constant outages at Fremont and heard about the same at London DC as well.

You mean the SSD providers who cost many times more than Linode? I've tried a few SSD-based instances. Storm is pretty good, but considerably more expensive. Cleverkite and Digital Ocean are both far worse. I wouldn't trust any valuable infrastructure to a provider who offers fast I/O on a crippled network, or who only lets you do fast I/O for a couple of seconds before your instance gets throttled into oblivion, eve…

Post by mctx » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 3:07 AM UTC

jackowayed wrote: post #28

pavs wrote: post #10

I never quite understood the love for premium vps like linode (also remember slicehost?). If you check out lowendbox vps, their top-rated providers almost always beats linode (and alike) in almost all category you can think of. Its nice that they are now increasing the bandwidth cap, but it was on the low side to begin with. My takeaway from this is that "linode finally joins everyone else in network speed and bandwi…

If you're actually running a business off of a VPS, where the cost of downtime far outstrips the monthly bill, it's absolutely worth paying more. I have a VPS I found on lowend box. $5/month for a 512MB OpenVZ. It's a pretty good deal, and it does what I need it to do; I have full control over it, I can give other people access to it, I can run any kind of website on it as long as I don't care too much about performa…