DigitalOcean Raises $37.2M From Andreessen Horowitz to Take on AWS

Post by blueskin_ » Fri, Mar 07, 2014, 12:19 PM UTC

thejosh wrote: post #270

blueskin_ wrote: post #246

Do they have IPv6 yet? What about actual security too? Maybe they'll stop the censorship if they want to be a real VPS player? ( https://vpsexperience.wordpress.com/ ) Oh, and I wish they'd use real industry terms, not stuff like 'Droplet'. That's just stupid. Right now, anyone at all who aren't GoDaddy or Network Solutions are better than Digital Ocean. You get what you pay for (AWS excepted, who are price gouging).…

Happy Linode customer, who gets hacked constantly and lies about it... Hmmmmmmmmm....

Post by ceejayoz » Fri, Mar 07, 2014, 12:34 PM UTC

jcampbell1 wrote: post #238

ceejayoz wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That being said, do they dump your instance if they reboot the physical server? I was under the impression that "Oh we want to upgrade they hypervisor kernel, your instance is toast", was fairgame/default on Amazon. Nope. In most cases, you get two weeks warning before a physical host is decommissioned. I've gotten as little as 24 hours (guessing it was a more significant than usual hardware issue). When that happe…

You mean they copy the ephemeral disk over? Really? Amazon should really advertise this, if that is the case. I was under the impression that Amazon couldn't be relied on as a VPS.

Post by tankenmate » Fri, Mar 07, 2014, 1:14 PM UTC

bananas wrote: post #14

Adding to the commentary on here with something not so gushing: * kernels lag terribly behind the distributions meaning you're wide open sometimes. * can't resize or add storage * no freebsd support or custom kernels * VM availability problems. If you want to have another box, you aren't guaranteed to get one. * no IPv6 * somewhat shonky security reputation. * cant deliver to yahoo mail from their AMS2 IPs I've been…

Post by rlpb » Fri, Mar 07, 2014, 2:21 PM UTC

nknighthb wrote: post #216

bad_user wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iptables is powerful but definitely not simple. Simple is being able to simply say " allow all outgoing traffic and incoming traffic should only be allowed for HTTP(S) and SSH " and being able to figure out how to do it by just invoking "ufw --help". Maybe someday I'll learn about iptables, I'm sure it's going to be worth it, but for now ufw does the job for me.

> iptables is powerful but definitely not simple. > Maybe someday I'll learn about iptables Hmm... iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j ALLOW iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ALLOW iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ALLOW iptables -A INPUT -p icmp -j ALLOW iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -j DROP So complicated...

Post by robogrowth » Fri, Mar 07, 2014, 3:23 PM UTC

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #143

robogrowth wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why not do both? I program, and have a small self sustaining micro farm. Just placed my order for 28 spring chickens, and 3 turkey's which will provide most of the meat for my family throughout the winter. I will supliment with fish and meat that I catch or hunt down. I also have a vegitable garden which we can most of our food from or preserve in other ways. :) If I want a chicken that tastes just as good as the one…

I envy you. :)