Has anyone worked with the cable companies on internet connections for hosting? Eg. Comcast, TW.
I worked with a sales rep for Comcast a few years ago on a solution for our offices. He worked out a line that would give us 3+mbits up speed for less then the price of a T1.
It also included a dedicated line to our offices. Would using a cable line be a bad idea for a hosting connection?
I'm having a hard time finding a source that has the Supermicro CBL-0084L splitter cable in stock. Any suggestions where I could get my hands on about 10 to 20 of these at a reasonable price? Maybe more if the price is right.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI have had a few Colo and Dedicated servers but I have decided that the traffic I am getting on my sites warrants using a large setup so I have four servers that I need to colo to one site.
My major question is that when I go colo they generally only supply one Cat 5 cable and what is the best setup to have for a switch/router? Generally you get enough IP addresses to have one per server so my guess is that you can just plug the switch/router in and away you go?
I am going to have one server as a load balancer then two as the load balanced pair and then a database server.
SoftLayer recently added TW Cable to their BGP mix. However, it is Time Warner Cable, while the ones I usually see is TW Telecom.
View 12 Replies View RelatedWe are looking for new network cable labels...
Perhaps something like this:
[url]
What distributor are you guys using for cable management?
I know typically at least CAT5 cable is to be used for FE or Gig-E Ethernet links, but can CAT3 cable be used at short distances? I know there is little to none cost difference in the cable price, but I am only allowed to used the preinstalled cable at this location which is CAT3 which is what Verizon typically runs for telephone cables.
View 14 Replies View RelatedSo we have 10 racks of mess in our custom colo cage. Each rack currently has 20+ servers, most with dual network interfaces hooked up, most racks with two switches and 3+ apc remote power strips per rack. Each rack is an APC 4 post unit [url]
We have no cable management trays and currently tie up cables with velco and zapstraps, trying to keep power cables to the left and cat5 cables to the right. Unfortunately, even with all our effort, it's really turning into a wall of cabling that is basically insulating each rack and causing a temperature issue (or the potential for one at least).
Even worse, we want to add in KVM over IP hooked up on nearly every server. While I see the great benefits of the KVM, I can't see how on earth we are going to make the cabling work out!
i was trying to search for reviews on time warner cable and was not able to find any. I would like to hear from ppl using it like what is the quality of bandwidth and what is their pricing structure.
View 14 Replies View RelatedI have a Linux Server (CentOS 4.4) running, it has two network cards.
1. Onboard 100MBit (eth0), uses DHCP to obtain IP, this card is the only one that is able to connect to the internet.
IP: 192.168.1.13
Subnet: 255.255.255.0
Gateway: 192.168.1.1
Bcast: 192.168.1.255
2. PCI Gigabit card (eth1), uses static IP, and is connected to my Windows machines via a CROSSOVER cable.
IP: 192.168.2.2
Subnet: 255.255.255.0
Gateway: NONE
Bcast: 192.168.2.255
Before I installed the gigabit card all internet was working fine. However now i cannot even ping? here is some more info:
PHP Code:
[root@node home]# ifconfig eth0
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr
inet addr:192.168.1.13 Bcast:192.168.1.225 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::213:20ff:fee9:69de/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:473 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:462 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:60513 (59.0 KiB) TX bytes:497973 (486.3 KiB)
[root@node home]# ifconfig eth1
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr
inet addr:192.168.2.2 Bcast:192.168.2.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::20c:76ff:fe7d:46/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:15996232 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:7250441 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:1137563077 (1.0 GiB) TX bytes:437192485 (416.9 MiB)
Interrupt:177 Base address:0x2f00
[root@node home]# netstat -nr
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags MSS Window irtt Iface
192.168.39.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 vmnet1
192.168.2.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
172.16.123.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 vmnet8
169.254.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
[root@node home]# route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
192.168.39.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 vmnet1
192.168.2.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
192.168.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
172.16.123.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 vmnet8
169.254.0.0 * 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
[root@node home]#
Im sure its just a few lines I need to change somewhere, just not sure where?
I put this in the co-location section since I am co-locating a server that I host a few Websites on. The server is located in the Pacfic Northwest at a hosting company out there. As you may know, this is a "more remote" area of the United States.
Today, the company lost all Internet access when a Fiber optic cable went down. Not only was my stufff down but the entire hosting company was down. In 10 years of doing Internet development, I have never seen this happen to any hosting company I have worked with no matter how good or bad they were. On top of that, it happened one time last year as well.
According to my co-location provider, the problem happened a long way up stream. SO far that the lines cannot be backed up. Is this true? Could a fiber optic cable fail at some point where it cannot be switched over to another line?
I don't know if I should I believe that or not. It would seem to me that it is a matter of money and they may not have a back-up system in place if the pipe goes down. Is it possible? Who's fault is it?
Should i use a filber cable line for hosting server?
and which methods to security my hosting server such as : which Firewall, ANti-virus, ..?
I have a laptop and redhat box. The laptop has wireless card and connected to internet using wireless router. Can I connect to redhat box to laptop using cross over cable and use internet? If so, how can I do it?
View 2 Replies View Relatedif anybody know the cable pin out on making a console cable using those serial adapters?
View 1 Replies View RelatedCan I just get a DSL line or a cable modem and host the site or my own computer?
View 14 Replies View Relatedif anyone have experience with remote MySQL server setup
I have 2 servers in the same datacenter, 1 serve as web server, and 1 serve as mysql server.
would my remote MySQL server slows down my site load if it's not connected through cross cable? it's on the same datacenter though
Like the title says it: Is there anywhere in the bay area where I could colo a box and get a cable tv feed without paying an arm and a leg? Nothing illegal going on here either
View 0 Replies View RelatedSometimes my server surcharge load average increase at 60 , and all my configuration are OK
when i type :
netstat -plan|grep :80|awk {'print $5'}|cut -d: -f 1|sort|uniq -c|sort -nk 1
i have : ...
I tried to update a plugin at my blog its a wordpress blog, as soon as the update was started that site on the server stopped working, (later on i closed the upgradation window), after few minutes website start working automatically, Now in my opinion I think that update process is still running in background thats why connections are creating continuously to that website IP.
[root@server ~]# netstat -alpn | grep :80 | awk '{print $4}' | cut -d: -f1 |sort |uniq -c
1001 serverIPhere
its even touching 1500, I tried to contact my server support but unfortunately they can investigate the issue, instead they told me to check with the following command.
netstat -plan |grep :80 | awk '{print $5}' | cut -d: -f1 | sort | uniq -c
which is not an answer to my question. Can anybody please tell me why those connections are making to that website's IP? I don't think its a Ddos attack, because it was just started when i updated the plugin.
Could someone comment on the kind of load a VPS service can handle? If I were to run an HTTP server how many connection/sec would be realistic.
View 3 Replies View RelatedHow many simulteanous connections to the site do alot of webhosting company usually allow with shared hosting packages. I was wondering because4 some companies say pay $$ a month get 300gb of bandwith a month. Can they limit the bandwith by limiting your simulteanous connections? I am asking because I just found out my host only allows 50 per hosting package that is on a shared server. To me that seems to be very little.
View 1 Replies View RelatedWARNING: One or more of your DNS servers does not accept TCP connections. Although rarely used, TCP connections are occasionally used instead of UDP connections. When firewalls block the TCP DNS connections, it can cause hard-to-diagnose problems. The problem servers are:
Error [No response to TCP packets].
APF is installed on the server, how do I allow TCP DNS connections? I already added port 53 to ingress/egress for TCP and UDP.
I run this a few times a day:
netstat -ntu | awk '{print $5}' | cut -d: -f1 | sort | uniq -c | sort -n
and get outputs like (just the bottom here, IPs removed):
8 IP #1
8 IP #2
8 . . .etc
8
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
18
19
25
26
32
32
91
The server runs gallery2, how many connections does an IP need just to browse the gallery? I'd like to block wget etc, but don't want to hurt search engine optimization (SEO). Is there a compromise, like limiting IPs to 5 connections, so the site still gets crawled, just slower?
DDoS deflate is installed: [url]
which permabans IPs with 150+ connections
Also what are the commands to block and unblock these IPs,
Firewall TCP Out Connections
My server started lagging up and I processed my configserver firewall logs and founds tons of TCP out connections. How can I track down which user was making these connections, if possible?
i have a vps, and im current use lighttpd, but i want move to litespeed Standard. And i see they limit Max Concurrent Connections =150 on standard version.
but what is Max Concurrent Connections? where can i find it.
and is it the number connection via port 80 (netstat -nt | grep :80 | wc -l)?
Most of them are from Google and Yahoo...
Server is being heavily loaded beause of this.
I guess blocking crawlers is not the most brilliant
I signed up for a hosted account with gator and I don't understand something. They tell me it's a policy change for security reasons but the simultaneous SSH connections has been limited to 2. That's just nuts. Is there a real reason why someone would limit this? i need two for editors, one for shell and one for mysql. Minimum of 4. What security concern could cause them to pick 2 as the number?
I just don't get it.
Here's what they said to me.
info: Please wait for a HostGator operator to respond.
Channel Sanderson: Hi. We're working on our website and have run into a small snag. It seems we can only have two open SSH connections at a time this week. We were able to open more a couple weeks ago. Is this something that you can change?
Kella J.: Ok, the issue is.. You are only alllowed 2, no matter what..
Channel Sanderson: I believe we are not understanding each other. We're not trying to connect 10 times in a minute. We just need more connections. 2 is insufficient. We need a minimum of 4 simultaneous connections to our server.
Kella J.: I am sorry, I checked with my admin.. he said there is only a limit of 2, period..
Channel Sanderson: This is an unnecessary limitation in my view and badly limits my ability to do what I need to do.
Just logged in my cPanel, and Apache Server Status shows
Parent Server Generation: 7
Server uptime: 2 hours 52 minutes 5 seconds
Total accesses: 701666 - Total Traffic: 63.7 GB
CPU Usage: u1610.22 s255.4 cu0 cs0 - 18.1% CPU load
68 requests/sec - 6.3 MB/second - 95.2 kB/request
400 requests currently being processed, 0 idle workers
I told customer service and said my website (a big forum) have 4000 people now, I felt very slow, could the slowness caused by this max apache connection setting?
I got reply: "400 seems to be as high as Apache can go. Your httpd.conf settings currently show 500 max connections enabled. If Apache is stopping at 400 then this is it's hard limit for maximum connections. Also If it was able to go even higher you would eventually run into memory issues on the server that would cause the server to crash."
Can anyone tells me if "400 requests currently being processed, 0 idle workers " is a problem or could it be the cause of the slowness. I imagin if more people request connection, and apache can't deal with that much, it has to let those request wait in the queue, therefore caused slowness or time-out.
The seem server could deal with 8000 people online before, no any problem at all and speed was quite fast. I don't know what i should do now.
I've had a problem a couple of times where there is a bad ftp connection to a host. A trace reveals that there is a node timing out. What is a good way to work around this. Web based ftp client or other solution?
View 0 Replies View RelatedHow can I Limit connections per IP in IIS6?
For example 10 connection per IP is allowed in a minute.
my server always have problem about the mysql connection:
Discuz! info: Can not connect to MySQL server
Time: 2004-5-14 8:55am
Script: /index.php
Error: Too many connections
Errno.: 1040
Similar error report has beed dispatched to administrator before.
i find the solution:
add "set-variable = max_connections=1000" in my.cnf file
but didnt find the file my.cnf,my control panel is directadmin,
My PHP application is starting to reach max mysql server user connections limit (currently set to 60). I listed mysql process list in phpmyadmin and found there lot of queries with status "LOCKED" these hang there for a long time(not always just sometimes - twice a day) and then connection limit is reached. It causes load average about 40 for as long as 10 - 20 minutes
I think it may be bacause of query structure. There are some queries with many inner joins...
Here is typical situation from phpmyadmin's process list:
1. select ... from table_1
inner join table_2
inner join table_3
inner join table_4
inner join table_5
This show status : "Copying to tmp table" in phpmyadmin
2. update table_2 set ....
This shows status: Locked
3. select ... from table_2
This shows status: Locked
Seems then when temp table is being created the table_2 is locked and it cannot make update to table_2. or maybe it's locked because of just that update on table_2.
I want to avoid of creating temp tables... Can it help if I'll make separate selects without large table joins ?