I am having a strange DNS issue on a Cogent circuit using Cogent DNS servers at 126.96.36.199 and 188.8.131.52. What is happening is that some domain requests will timeout the first try. Then subsequent tries will be quick with no timeouts.
I am having a very hard time getting through to Cogent that there might be an issue somewhere and I was wondering if anyone on a Cogent line using the same Cogent DNS servers could also do a test for me to and see if you can reproduce any timeouts.
How I am testing: - Open nslookup (in linux use: nslookup -timeout=2, windows defaults to 2 seconds) - Picking a random domain name (favorite cereal.com, movie title.com, brand name.com, random word.com) - Repeating test for same domain if timeout occurs to see the next query resolve instantly
Here is an example of what Is happening for me: Code: [eger@womp ~]# nslookup -timeout=2 > superman.com ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached > superman.com Server: 184.108.40.206 Address: 220.127.116.11#53
Non-authoritative answer: Name: superman.com Address: 18.104.22.168 > napaautoparts.com ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached > napaautoparts.com Server: 22.214.171.124 Address: 126.96.36.199#53
I currently use a half cabinet and think I'm paying way too much. I pay $1,000/month for half rack (10 meg bandwidth) 20 amps power, etc. Service and connectivity has been great (Ashburn, VA data center) but I think it's just over priced.
What should I pay for half cab, 20 amps, 5-10 MEG bandwidth, 20 amps?
On that note, what if I was to go for a full cabinet solution, same power and bandwidth, what is ultimately the expected price for a reputable colo provider?
I have been using Cogent for many years and have always been pretty pleased with the service and bandwidth (I know many consider bottom rate/budget bandwidth). I would usually be able to call in and speak with someone who could check routing, login to switches to verify port settings, and make reverse DNS changes right then and there.
Within the last 6 months though I have been getting pretty poor support from them. Seems they are hiring more and more people just to be able to answer phones. The techs seem to have a hard time comprehending even simple reverse DNS requests and always ask me to hold for extended periods of time.
Today I called in and was even asked to hold right as they picked up the phone!! I mean, if your just going to pick up to ask me to hold, why pick up in the first place until you are ready?
I am considering getting a server from take2hosting.com. Their offer is great and sales has been very helpful and fast. Left definitely a good impression.
The downside is that they are on Cogent-only bandwidth. In the past I have really gotten something against Cogent, mainly due to one of my FDC servers being routed over Cogent and only pulling 10K/sec to Europe.
How is the Cogent network nowadays? Has it improved since a year ago? Worth considering?
From my tests the speeds are actually really great. They are located in San Jose, and I am testing speeds to Europe. For example to Surfnet Amsterdam (Cogent hands off the traffic to Surfnet in Amsterdam, so its on the Cogent network all the way) I am able to pull 2.53MB/sec. This is an incredible speed for a Westcoast<->Europe transfer. It almost makes me believe Cogent has started getting its act together.
For people who would like to test speeds, please use this test file. Especially European tests would be interesting, and it would be great if you could post where cogent hands off traffic from LosAngeles to either your network or a transit network. (In the US or Europe)
Right now I am hosting on a Level3/GlobalCrossing network @ the eastcoast. This works really well but it shows in the price. If I could combine a couple of budget boxes into one of those Quadcores it would save quite a lot. Question is: Is Cogent trustworty nowadays?
Thanks for your input
Ps. I know that hosting on a single-homed network is not the smartest thing to do. However they will add more carriers soon so this will not really be an issue. I'm expecting them to not drop Cogent tho, so my question remains
I use APC Netshelter cabinets now; I have a need for some cabinets with 23-inch wide rails, capable of holding telco muxes, rectifiers, batteries, etc. Any suggestions on cabinet?
Something that would blend in with APC Netshelters (black, bowed/curved door on cold aisle) would be nice. I know I've seen a cabinet very similar to Netshelter delivered from NetApp, but with a grey/off-black color, and 1-piece door on the hot aisle. If APC is just sourcing their cabinets from some manufacturer who takes engineering requests, it would be great to find out who makes them.
I'm planning to move my co-located server to a cabinet soon. We are adding dedicated web & database servers to take the load off of the main box. I will get one GigE drop in this cabinet, so obviously I need a switch.
No routing is needed on my end, so my guess is that the regular GigE switch would do just fine. But I have few concerns about my setup.
All of my servers have dual GigE port. My plan is to connect one to the internet, and another to a local private lan for SMB, database, SNMP, and such. Jumbo frame is enabled on a private lan.
Is there any 16-port switch that allows me to assign 8 ports into one virtual switch (1500-byte frame) and another 8 into another virtual switch (9000-byte frame) ?
On the internet side, I expect to be pushing around 300-400mbps, a bit higher on the private lan. I need a very stable switch that won't choke or crash at this rate.
I'd also like to be able to limit throughput on each port, and probably do port/ip filtering on this switch instead of iptables on each box. (Am I asking too much for a switch?)
We use Cogent at our colo, and since this Monday (8/13/07) we've been gettin dozens of complaints from AOL users stating that connections to our sites are very, very slow and often time out.
We tested from an AOL session and were able to confirm this. We found this odd, because it came out of the blue and nothing had changed on our end. We also get excellent all-around performance from other (non AOL) connections, be it dialup or broadband.
We went ahead and did a bunch of traceroutes on the AOL session. We found things get bogged down as soon as it hits Cogent's routers in DC (timeouts / no response). These AOL sessions have no problems whatsoever with other sites and other (non cogent hosted sites) loaded fast and without issue. We then tested loading Cogent's own web site from the AOL session and saw the same sluggishness as well. The same happened when we tested a couple other Cogent client sites from AOL. They all pulled very slow (10 to 35+ secs per page) on an AOL/DSL session. This did not happen on the same broadband connection w/out AOL running on top of it. The same pages loaded very fast.
Just wondering if other Cogent clients are experiencing this? :? We have not heard from them about this, but wanted to know if this is something isolated or not.
When looking at the 1U's, I have to search really long and hard trying to find a half-decent host. A lot of companies skimp on something when offering colo, and makes for a bad day when that particular service is needed.
On the other hand, I see a lot of colocation offers for great deals on Cabinets and half Cabinets. High, premium bandwidth, PLENTY of amps, top of the line support, etc. It would be tempting to go for these, except I only have a single unit server.
I was going to give up on finding a good colo, then I got an idea. What if I got together a few other people, we all pitched in for our slice of a cabinet, and bring the price well within reasonable limits for those of us with low demands?
Would it be too difficult to do something like this? If you run across this topic and are looking for colo, would you be willing to give this a shot?
there is anyone out there who has their infrastructure colocated in cogent owned datacenter. And how stable and secure is it. The only reason i m interested in Cogent owned colo is that they provide solid SLA.
Could you guys look and see if what I am seeing is right? They offer Global Crossing and Cogent officially. So if I use GLBX looking glass, I get this.
Trying trace from node 'Miami, FL, US' to '96.31.73.xxx' 1 188.8.131.52 (184.108.40.206) 0.761 ms 0.608 ms 2 so0-0-0-2488M.ar2.TPA1.gblx.net (220.127.116.11) 5.690 ms 5.695 ms 3 WBS-CONNECT-LLC.ae0.409.ar2.TPA1.gblx.net (18.104.22.168) 5.731 ms 5.880 ms 4 22.214.171.124 (126.96.36.199) 7.442 ms 6.667 ms 5 node1.sarorahosting.com (188.8.131.52) 15.734 ms 15.993 ms 6 96.31.73.xxx (96.31.73.xxx) 15.861 ms 15.795 ms
Now if I tracert from the VPS to the GLBX router, I get this.
traceroute to 184.108.40.206 (220.127.116.11), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 node1.sarorahosting.com (18.104.22.168) 0.072 ms 0.035 ms 0.008 ms 2 22.214.171.124 (126.96.36.199) 0.731 ms 0.863 ms 1.003 ms 3 gi0-6.na21.b001841-0.tpa01.atlas.cogentco.com (188.8.131.52) 1.147 ms 1.142 ms 1.428 ms 4 gi4-1.core01.tpa01.atlas.cogentco.com (184.108.40.206) 0.818 ms 0.814 ms 0.807 ms 5 po2-0.core01.mco01.atlas.cogentco.com (220.127.116.11) 148.004 ms * * 6 po5-0.core01.jax01.atlas.cogentco.com (18.104.22.168) 5.847 ms 5.839 ms 5.872 ms 7 po5-0.core01.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (22.214.171.124) 11.953 ms 23.819 ms 23.870 ms 8 te3-3.ccr01.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (126.96.36.199) 11.721 ms 11.752 ms 11.787 ms 9 te8-2.mpd01.atl04.atlas.cogentco.com (188.8.131.52) 11.962 ms 11.921 ms 11.987 ms 10 ge4-1-0-390-1000M.ar4.ATL1.gblx.net (184.108.40.206) 12.252 ms 12.359 ms 12.444 ms 11 220.127.116.11 (18.104.22.168) 16.026 ms 16.061 ms 16.594 ms