Howdy, Stranger!

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


VPS in AT and CH
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

VPS in AT and CH

I am looking for some more informations and probably offers for a vps in AT and in CH.
more detailed I am looking for something using KVM with around 1GB RAM, 1TB bw, budget less than 10€ p.m.

must have IPs correctly geo-located to thecountries, while this is not about watching IPTV or something alike, I simply need the IPs to show the correct locations and not some random other countries based on old geo-location entries.

as said before I also don't really want any 2.6.x ovz kernel crap, so kvm, xen is also much preferred.

of course I know of edis.at offering swiss and also austria, that probably will be the fallback if I don't find anything else, though I am interested in experiences with edis for those locations too, if someone is able to share... also this is somewhat the limit for the budget, so while appreciating any help, I really don't need offers above that price tag.

tagging @william here, because he's probably most knowledgable for that area ;-)

so far for swiss I am looking at these providers besides edis:

https://www.hosttech.ch
https://www.fsit.com
https://transcomag.net
https://incloudibly.net

while hosttech seems to have a german branch which of course I like, fsit seems to be par on price also offering even smaller package, but can't tell if those prices include VAT or not.
pricing of transcomag seems a tad lower and therefor interesting but never heard of them before.
incloudibly have been mentioned on LET before, so maybe someone can share experiences?

for AT vps I am actually looking at:

https://www.emerion.com
https://www.ipax.at
https://www.world4you.com

while emerion seems to be a brand of anexia directly which I would like, there is no mention anywhere on how virtualization is done or at least I missed it.
ipax offers windows with there vps so I assume to be on kvm or xen here, yet I don't have much infos about their business either.
world4you has been mentioned on LET already, yet I don't see anything about the virtualization used. also there is some kind of indifferent paragraph telling that those vservers are 'not intended for the use as vpn' (amongst other things) - whatever that means, this also isn't part or clarified in their AGB anyways.

I know @dediserve also offers vienna/anexia, but in the last thread they have been mentioned someone pointed out their IP range probably geo-locates to germany, so sadly that's a showstopper here unless they can verify to have correctly located austrian IPs ;-)

I'd be glad to get some more valuable input or at least some blanks filled in by anyone knowledgable. thanks in advance!

Thanked by 2ucxo dediserve

Comments

  • @Falzo Lunarvps.com, rackend.com, sinavps.ch

    Thanked by 2Falzo rauppe31
  • hawchawc Moderator, LIR

    @kcaj could probably help

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • J1021J1021 Member

    hawc said: @kcaj could probably help

    Thanks Harry!

    The offers on vps247.com seem to fit your requirements.

    Test files

    If anybody wants a little credit to get them going, signup and drop me a PM with your email address.

    Thanked by 2Falzo ehab
  • FalzoFalzo Member

    @ansiklopedi said:
    @Falzo Lunarvps.com, rackend.com, sinavps.ch

    thanks, I looked at lunarvps before, but for them and also rackend I'd much like more informations who really is behind them and of course what IP space they own and where it really locates too ;-) for sinavps I have to admit I totally forgot about, that seems to be an option too, yet there KVM range seems a bit more expensive compared to my former CH list ;-)

    any reviews or more information on them are appreciated of course...

  • FalzoFalzo Member

    @kcaj said:

    hawc said: @kcaj could probably help

    Thanks Harry!

    The offers on vps247.com seem to fit your requirements.

    Test files

    If anybody wants a little credit to get them going, signup and drop me a PM with your email address.

    thanks, PMed , trial for free is a very big plus indeed ;-)

  • estnocestnoc Member, Patron Provider

    I can provide you vps with your requested specs for 10eur month. KVM it is. Geo location is correct. I have Austria and Switzerland aswell. If you want, i can share the promo code for you that makes the discounted price 10eur. Just let me know.

    Thanked by 2J1021 Falzo
  • WilliamWilliam Member
    edited April 2017

    W4Y is OpenVZ in Linz (rare) and Vienna (SCS, but no VPS there i think).

    Emerion is OVZ also iirc (no idea anymore, cancelled, was ok but not worth the price).

    IPAX is newer doing business in Vienna with colo in IX (via Nextlayer) and NDC, generally not bad but not really cheap either. 185 IP space with AT geo. Ugly af website and the flat traffic is questionable at 8EUR obviously.

    Dediserve has geo issues at times (shows DE; rented space) and is either Datasix (cheaper, Anexia owned) or IX (more expensive, regardless it is singlehomed Anexia). Expensive, even for AT.

    VPS247/M247 has "ok" geo but not perfect either. Extremely weird routing at times, and half of Austrian traffic passes Frankfurt or worse. Cheap.

    Easyserver is owned by Streams (old) but also OVZ, pricing not TOO bad though. Geo ok.

    Domaintechnik/Ledl is a pretty good network, not too cheap and not much traffic though. Geo ok. Linux-vserver which has it's issues (read: only use if you KNOW this.).

    Vipweb (also old) has KVM on Proxmox in IX for ~6EUR (paid yearly only), not sure what network as usually his stuff is on Linznet. Traffic limits low.

    Internex had UPC singlehomed, now multihomed behind Anexia - Fiberlink seems to be a JV between them or owned by Internex, i'd suspect that Internex also ends up in Anexia soon so might be not as useful.

  • FalzoFalzo Member

    @William said:

    thanks a ton for that input!

    do you also have some infos on the situation in CH - which of course seems more easy then austria so far...

    @kcaj kindly set me up with some credits, so I am going to try out on his service and have a look at the routing of course ;-)

    also thanks @estnoc for offering, I am looking into some cheaper options now, but will get back to you, if I don't find any satisfying solutions.

  • @William said:

    IPAX is newer doing business in Vienna with colo in IX (via Nextlayer) and NDC, generally not bad but not really cheap either. 185 IP space with AT geo. Ugly af website and the flat traffic is questionable at 8EUR obviously.

    did not fairnode had something (vmnodes) at ipax? maybe they can offer Falzo a good deal

  • Butters said: did not fairnode had something (vmnodes) at ipax? maybe they can offer Falzo a good deal

    Nope, does not seem so at this time/IP space not announced anymore either

    Falzo said: do you also have some infos on the situation in CH

    There is another thread with some listed, due to legal ambiguity not much interested in CH. Only really useful if you are inside. Easier in some ways yes, cheaper... not really anymore.

    estnoc said: I can provide you vps with your requested specs for 10eur month. KVM it is. Geo location is correct.

    What network is that?


    There is also still FDCServers which is singlehomed Cogent, if that is anyones thing. Might work for some use cases pretty well. Mbit based limits, so only makes sense on larger.

    Lucesem (don't ask me how to spell that) has Klagenfurt which is probably the old Anexia space in Kelag - No actual plans/prices on website but colo is listed & "ok" outside of BW.

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • FalzoFalzo Member

    a short follow-up on @kcaj's offers via vps247.com - did some of my usual benchmarks, so posting them here as might be of interest to others...

    I spun up an instance in vienna and zurich, took the basic one, which only comes with 512MB, but should suffice for testing anyways.

    vienna first:

    geekbench: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/2332607

    dd if=/dev/zero of=tmpfile bs=64k count=64k conv=fdatasync
    4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB, 4.0 GiB) copied, 4.45155 s, 965 MB/s

    ioping -c 10 .

    --- . (ext4 /dev/sda1) ioping statistics ---
    9 requests completed in 3.34 ms, 36 KiB read, 2.69 k iops, 10.5 MiB/s
    generated 10 requests in 9.00 s, 40 KiB, 1 iops, 4.44 KiB/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 347.0 us / 371.3 us / 471.3 us / 36.6 us
    

    fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=64k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --numjobs=4 --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=66

    test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=64K-64K/64K-64K/64K-64K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
    fio-2.16
    Starting 4 processes
    Jobs: 4 (f=4): [m(4)] [100.0% done] [554.4MB/281.1MB/0KB /s] [8868/4497/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2002: Mon Apr  3 11:55:44 2017
      read : io=2703.8MB, bw=137490KB/s, iops=2148, runt= 20137msec
      write: io=1392.3MB, bw=70798KB/s, iops=1106, runt= 20137msec
      cpu          : usr=1.05%, sys=2.52%, ctx=43642, majf=0, minf=8
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=43260/w=22276/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2003: Mon Apr  3 11:55:44 2017
      read : io=2723.7MB, bw=138859KB/s, iops=2169, runt= 20085msec
      write: io=1372.4MB, bw=69968KB/s, iops=1093, runt= 20085msec
      cpu          : usr=0.98%, sys=2.59%, ctx=43700, majf=0, minf=8
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=43578/w=21958/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2004: Mon Apr  3 11:55:44 2017
      read : io=2709.4MB, bw=137893KB/s, iops=2154, runt= 20120msec
      write: io=1386.7MB, bw=70572KB/s, iops=1102, runt= 20120msec
      cpu          : usr=1.09%, sys=2.49%, ctx=43812, majf=0, minf=7
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=43350/w=22186/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=2005: Mon Apr  3 11:55:44 2017
      read : io=2702.6MB, bw=137751KB/s, iops=2152, runt= 20090msec
      write: io=1393.5MB, bw=71024KB/s, iops=1109, runt= 20090msec
      cpu          : usr=1.00%, sys=2.59%, ctx=43710, majf=0, minf=7
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=43241/w=22295/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    
    Run status group 0 (all jobs):
       READ: io=10839MB, aggrb=551197KB/s, minb=137490KB/s, maxb=138859KB/s, mint=20085msec, maxt=20137msec
      WRITE: io=5544.8MB, aggrb=281956KB/s, minb=69968KB/s, maxb=71024KB/s, mint=20085msec, maxt=20137msec
    
    Disk stats (read/write):
      sda: ios=179672/92239, merge=2530/705, ticks=2006764/973008, in_queue=2979764, util=99.66%
    

    download speeds

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    CPU model            : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2670 v3 @ 2.30GHz
    Number of cores      : 1
    CPU frequency        : 2299.996 MHz
    Total amount of ram  : 492 MB
    Total amount of swap : 0 MB
    System uptime        : 0days, 0:18:25
    Load average         : 0.00, 0.02, 0.03
    OS                   : Debian GNU/Linux 9
    Arch                 : x86_64 (64 Bit)
    Kernel               : 4.9.0-2-amd64
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Node Name           IPv4 address        Download Speed
    CacheFly            205.234.175.175     80.7MB/s
    Vultr, Tokyo, JP        108.61.201.151      4.85MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP       2400:8900::4b       5.55MB/s
    DO, Bangalore, IN       2400:6180:100:d0::4f5:4001      9.79MB/s
    Softlayer, Chennai, IN      2401:c900:1501:14::4        5.26MB/s
    Vultr, Singapore, SG        45.32.100.168       
    DO, Singapore, SG       2400:6180:0:d0::2a30:5001       7.18MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG       2400:8901::4b       5.17MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG    2401:c900:1101:8::2     5.85MB/s
    Leaseweb, Singapore, SG     103.254.153.18      6.02MB/s
    Softlayer, HongKong, CN     119.81.130.170      5.07MB/s
    Leaseweb, HongKong, CN      2001:df1:801:a002::3649     913KB/s
    Vultr, Sydney, AUS      108.61.212.117      3.78MB/s
    Softlayer, Sydney, AUS      2401:c900:1401:2d::4        3.89MB/s
    Softlayer, Melbourne, AUS   2401:c900:1301:2f::4        4.21MB/s
    Tele2, Gothenberg, SE       2a00:800:1010:1::2      3.08MB/s
    Tele2, Kista, SE        2a00:800:1010:3::2      29.8MB/s
    Softlayer, Milan, IT        2a03:8180:1501:27::4        1006KB/s
    Prometeus, Milan, IT        37.247.53.10        25.8MB/s
    Tele2, Riga, LV     2a00:800:1010:9::2      27.6MB/s
    Tele2, Vilnius, LT      2a00:800:1010:6::2      25.5MB/s
    Server.LU, Luxembourg, LU   94.242.192.2        55.6MB/s
    Tele2, Frankfurt, DE        2a00:800:1010:2::2      78.5MB/s
    Vultr, Frankfurt, DE        108.61.210.117      63.1MB/s
    Linode, Frankfurt, DE       2a01:7e01::4b       16.2MB/s
    Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE    159.122.69.4        341KB/s
    Leaseweb, Frankfurt, DE     37.58.58.140        71.3MB/s
    DO, Frankfurt, DE       46.101.201.140      96.1MB/s
    Vultr, Paris, FR        108.61.209.127      34.8MB/s
    OVH, Gravelines, FR     5.196.90.200        14.3MB/s
    OVH, Strasbourg, FR     5.135.128.81        17.4MB/s
    OVH, Roubaix, FR        188.165.12.106      46.5MB/s
    Online.Net, Paris, FR       62.210.18.40        41.6MB/s
    Tele2, Amsterdam, NL        90.130.74.153       31.9MB/s
    Vultr, Amsterdam, NL        108.61.198.102      42.9MB/s
    DO 2, Amsterdam, NL     146.185.152.145     86.0MB/s
    DO 3, Amsterdam, NL     178.62.219.145      83.9MB/s
    Leaseweb, Amsterdam, NL     5.79.108.33     77.6MB/s
    i3d, Amsterdam, NL      213.163.76.200      44.0MB/s
    Vultr, London, UK       108.61.196.101      35.3MB/s
    DO, London, UK      188.166.152.227     52.8MB/s
    Linode, London, UK      176.58.107.39       52.3MB/s
    Softlayer, London, UK       5.10.97.132     37.8MB/s
    Softlayer, Mexico, MX       169.57.4.116        7.26MB/s
    Softlayer, Brazil, BR       169.57.128.148      5.48MB/s
    DO 1, NYC, USA      67.205.188.39       16.2MB/s
    DO 2, NYC, USA      162.243.9.77        16.8MB/s
    DO 3, NYC, USA      138.197.20.252      16.6MB/s
    Vultr, New Jersey, USA      108.61.149.182      4.81MB/s
    Linode, Newark, USA     50.116.57.237       15.1MB/s
    Vultr, Illinois, USA        107.191.51.12       7.79MB/s
    Vultr, Atlanta, USA     108.61.193.166      9.69MB/s
    Linode, Atlanta, USA        50.116.39.117       13.2MB/s
    Vultr, Miami, USA       104.156.244.232     8.76MB/s
    Vultr, Washington, USA      108.61.194.105      7.80MB/s
    Softlayer, Seattle, USA     67.228.112.250      7.44MB/s
    Leaseweb, Washington, USA   108.59.10.97        15.0MB/s
    Vultr, Dallas, USA      108.61.224.175      7.39MB/s
    Linode, Dallas, USA     50.116.25.154       11.8MB/s
    Softlayer, Dallas, USA      173.192.68.18       8.53MB/s
    Leaseweb, Dallas, USA       209.58.153.1        11.8MB/s
    Vultr, Los Angeles, USA     108.61.219.200      985KB/s
    DO, San Francisco, USA      138.68.237.46       8.97MB/s
    DO, San Francisco, USA      192.241.209.37      9.20MB/s
    Linode, Fremont, USA        50.116.14.9     5.15MB/s
    Leaseweb, San Francisco, USA    209.58.135.187      9.88MB/s
    DO, Toronto, CA     138.197.135.163     14.2MB/s
    OVH, Beauharnois, CA        192.99.19.165       3.26MB/s
    EastLink, Canada, CA        24.222.0.194        6.00MB/s
    Softlayer, Montreal, CA     169.54.124.180      11.0MB/s
    
  • FalzoFalzo Member

    zurich then:

    geekbench: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/2332605

    dd if=/dev/zero of=tmpfile bs=64k count=64k conv=fdatasync
    4294967296 bytes (4.3 GB, 4.0 GiB) copied, 4.51859 s, 951 MB/s

    ioping -c 10 .

    --- . (ext4 /dev/sda1) ioping statistics ---
    9 requests completed in 3.26 ms, 36 KiB read, 2.76 k iops, 10.8 MiB/s
    generated 10 requests in 9.00 s, 40 KiB, 1 iops, 4.44 KiB/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 321.4 us / 362.2 us / 411.6 us / 26.9 us
    

    fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=64k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --numjobs=4 --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=66

    test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=64K-64K/64K-64K/64K-64K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
    fio-2.16
    Starting 4 processes
    Jobs: 4 (f=4): [m(4)] [95.2% done] [561.1MB/300.2MB/0KB /s] [8990/4802/0 iops] [eta 00m:01s]
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=1956: Mon Apr  3 11:55:40 2017
      read : io=2703.8MB, bw=133506KB/s, iops=2086, runt= 20738msec
      write: io=1392.3MB, bw=68746KB/s, iops=1074, runt= 20738msec
      cpu          : usr=1.10%, sys=2.60%, ctx=44130, majf=0, minf=9
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=43260/w=22276/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=1957: Mon Apr  3 11:55:40 2017
      read : io=2723.7MB, bw=135086KB/s, iops=2110, runt= 20646msec
      write: io=1372.4MB, bw=68067KB/s, iops=1063, runt= 20646msec
      cpu          : usr=0.87%, sys=2.83%, ctx=43362, majf=0, minf=9
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=43578/w=21958/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=1958: Mon Apr  3 11:55:40 2017
      read : io=2709.4MB, bw=133964KB/s, iops=2093, runt= 20710msec
      write: io=1386.7MB, bw=68561KB/s, iops=1071, runt= 20710msec
      cpu          : usr=0.89%, sys=2.84%, ctx=43548, majf=0, minf=8
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=43350/w=22186/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=1959: Mon Apr  3 11:55:40 2017
      read : io=2702.6MB, bw=133537KB/s, iops=2086, runt= 20724msec
      write: io=1393.5MB, bw=68852KB/s, iops=1075, runt= 20724msec
      cpu          : usr=1.04%, sys=2.64%, ctx=43752, majf=0, minf=8
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.1%, >=64=99.9%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=43241/w=22295/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    
    Run status group 0 (all jobs):
       READ: io=10839MB, aggrb=535223KB/s, minb=133505KB/s, maxb=135086KB/s, mint=20646msec, maxt=20738msec
      WRITE: io=5544.8MB, aggrb=273785KB/s, minb=68067KB/s, maxb=68851KB/s, mint=20646msec, maxt=20738msec
    
    Disk stats (read/write):
      sda: ios=179056/92075, merge=2482/658, ticks=2047236/993044, in_queue=3044340, util=99.66%
    

    download speeds

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    CPU model            : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2670 v3 @ 2.30GHz
    Number of cores      : 1
    CPU frequency        : 2299.996 MHz
    Total amount of ram  : 492 MB
    Total amount of swap : 0 MB
    System uptime        : 0days, 0:18:25
    Load average         : 0.00, 0.02, 0.03
    OS                   : Debian GNU/Linux 9
    Arch                 : x86_64 (64 Bit)
    Kernel               : 4.9.0-2-amd64
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Node Name           IPv4 address        Download Speed
    CacheFly            205.234.175.175     100MB/s
    Vultr, Tokyo, JP        108.61.201.151      4.41MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP       2400:8900::4b       5.85MB/s
    DO, Bangalore, IN       2400:6180:100:d0::4f5:4001      9.43MB/s
    Softlayer, Chennai, IN      2401:c900:1501:14::4        5.74MB/s
    Vultr, Singapore, SG        45.32.100.168       6.46MB/s
    DO, Singapore, SG       2400:6180:0:d0::2a30:5001       7.46MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG       2400:8901::4b       5.28MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG    2401:c900:1101:8::2     6.07MB/s
    Leaseweb, Singapore, SG     103.254.153.18      4.86MB/s
    Softlayer, HongKong, CN     119.81.130.170      5.16MB/s
    Leaseweb, HongKong, CN      2001:df1:801:a002::3649     770KB/s
    Vultr, Sydney, AUS      108.61.212.117      3.43MB/s
    Softlayer, Sydney, AUS      2401:c900:1401:2d::4        3.82MB/s
    Softlayer, Melbourne, AUS   2401:c900:1301:2f::4        4.45MB/s
    Tele2, Gothenberg, SE       2a00:800:1010:1::2      29.7MB/s
    Tele2, Kista, SE        2a00:800:1010:3::2      30.1MB/s
    Softlayer, Milan, IT        2a03:8180:1501:27::4        34.6MB/s
    Prometeus, Milan, IT        37.247.53.10        58.0MB/s
    Tele2, Riga, LV     2a00:800:1010:9::2      30.3MB/s
    Tele2, Vilnius, LT      2a00:800:1010:6::2      30.5MB/s
    Server.LU, Luxembourg, LU   94.242.192.2        49.1MB/s
    Tele2, Frankfurt, DE        2a00:800:1010:2::2      92.3MB/s
    Vultr, Frankfurt, DE        108.61.210.117      77.6MB/s
    Linode, Frankfurt, DE       2a01:7e01::4b       16.5MB/s
    Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE    2a03:8180:1201:45::4        56.2MB/s
    Leaseweb, Frankfurt, DE     2a00:c98:2030:a034::21      51.4MB/s
    DO, Frankfurt, DE       2a03:b0c0:3:d0::3580:1      90.7MB/s
    Vultr, Paris, FR        108.61.209.127      47.1MB/s
    OVH, Gravelines, FR     2001:41d0:a:79c8::1     19.8MB/s
    OVH, Strasbourg, FR     2001:41d0:8:a051::1     17.3MB/s
    OVH, Roubaix, FR        2001:41d0:2:876a::1     62.7MB/s
    Online.Net, Paris, FR       62.210.18.40        52.9MB/s
    Tele2, Amsterdam, NL        2a00:800:1010:8::2      59.7MB/s
    Vultr, Amsterdam, NL        108.61.198.102      54.3MB/s
    DO 2, Amsterdam, NL     2a03:b0c0:0:1010::916:8001      102MB/s
    DO 3, Amsterdam, NL     2a03:b0c0:2:d0::16da:f001       102MB/s
    Leaseweb, Amsterdam, NL     2001:1af8:4700:b210::33     86.4MB/s
    i3d, Amsterdam, NL      2a00:1630:1:13d::13d        44.7MB/s
    Vultr, London, UK       108.61.196.101      39.4MB/s
    DO, London, UK      2a03:b0c0:1:a1::1102:1001       65.1MB/s
    Linode, London, UK      2a01:7e00::4b       64.1MB/s
    Softlayer, London, UK       2a03:8180:1101:5::4     51.8MB/s
    Softlayer, Mexico, MX       2607:f0d0:1c01::4       7.70MB/s
    Softlayer, Brazil, BR       2607:f0d0:1d01:12::4        6.08MB/s
    DO 1, NYC, USA      2604:a880:400:d0::17c1:6001     17.7MB/s
    DO 2, NYC, USA      2604:a880:0:1010::18a5:4001     17.8MB/s
    DO 3, NYC, USA      2604:a880:800:10::2821:2001     17.8MB/s
    Vultr, New Jersey, USA      108.61.149.182      13.4MB/s
    Linode, Newark, USA     2600:3c03::4b       17.4MB/s
    Vultr, Illinois, USA        107.191.51.12       9.32MB/s
    Vultr, Atlanta, USA     108.61.193.166      10.1MB/s
    Linode, Atlanta, USA        2600:3c02::4b       14.5MB/s
    Vultr, Miami, USA       104.156.244.232     9.71MB/s
    Vultr, Washington, USA      108.61.194.105      7.75MB/s
    Softlayer, Seattle, USA     2607:f0d0:2001:3::2     7.91MB/s
    Leaseweb, Washington, USA   2604:9a00:2010:a001:1:face:bad:c0de     12.1MB/s
    Vultr, Dallas, USA      108.61.224.175      8.71MB/s
    Linode, Dallas, USA     2600:3c00::4b       11.8MB/s
    Softlayer, Dallas, USA      2607:f0d0:1101:4::2     8.81MB/s
    Leaseweb, Dallas, USA       2606:9880:2100:b010::1531       12.1MB/s
    Vultr, Los Angeles, USA     108.61.219.200      6.84MB/s
    DO, San Francisco, USA      2604:a880:2:d0::c1f:8001        9.09MB/s
    DO, San Francisco, USA      2604:a880:1:20::226b:4001       9.52MB/s
    Linode, Fremont, USA        2600:3c01::4b       5.97MB/s
    Leaseweb, San Francisco, USA    2605:fe80:2100:b001::5187       9.88MB/s
    DO, Toronto, CA     2604:a880:cad:d0::7d6:1001      15.1MB/s
    OVH, Beauharnois, CA        2607:5300:60:44a5::1        3.40MB/s
    EastLink, Canada, CA        24.222.0.194        5.94MB/s
    Softlayer, Montreal, CA     2607:f0d0:3701:16::4        12.2MB/s
    

    sorry for the walls of text, but those small thingies are pretty awesome!! especially if you keep in mind, that they are doing hourly based billing too. of course IPs seem to be properly geolocated.

    for what it's worth @william also was right, and routing and latencies seems a bit weird. Yet I lack of experience for that area and probably need to further investigate if this matters at all before I finally decide on this. probably need to try some other providers to be able to compare on that point.

    again very big props @kcaj - seems to be a really nice service, I do like the whole interface and such, thanks for giving some credits to check this out and keep up your good work!

  • @Falzo

    keep in mind that the most nodes are barely used. the prices are way to high for such a big company like m247

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • FalzoFalzo Member

    @Butters said:
    @Falzo

    keep in mind that the most nodes are barely used. the prices are way to high for such a big company like m247

    thanks, normally I would be aiming at a price of around 5€ (without any VAT) for a 1GB KVM, though I am aware this might not be feasible to expect for those location.

    I'd probably have a look at transcom former kryutek in CH next, to gather some more informations on routing and latency ;-)

  • FalzoFalzo Member

    signed up with Transcom IT AG https://transcomag.net/ whole process ran smoothly, though they handle setups manually... location is Zug (not directly Zurich).

    They are using proxmox (ftw!) even for the clients and deploy a really empty VM, so I'd say that's quite adorable if you know proxmox and how to install first via console ^^

    will hopefully keep away a lot of abusers who probably would not want to go through the whole setup process and such. I really like that approach but nothing for unexperienced users at all.

    sadly their routing especially from and to germany seems even more weird then what I've seen before. to one vm in FFM I get 7-8ms to another ~35ms because the latter routes via AMS whyever... also latency seems jumpy to say at least, nothing I can really work with.

    bad enough, because performance is very decent (see below) and price ~6,8€ per 2GB RAM / 6TB FUP is very competitive :-( one simply can't have it all.

    just for the record/collection, benchmarks:

    geekbench: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/2340133

    dd if=/dev/zero of=tmpfile bs=64k count=32k conv=fdatasync
    2147483648 Bytes (2,1 GB, 2,0 GiB) kopiert, 5,9159 s, 363 MB/s

    ioping -c 10 .

    9 requests completed in 20.2 ms, 36 KiB read, 445 iops, 1.74 MiB/s
    generated 10 requests in 9.00 s, 40 KiB, 1 iops, 4.44 KiB/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 529.8 us / 2.25 ms / 14.2 ms / 4.23 ms
    

    fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=64k --iodepth=64 --size=512M --numjobs=2 --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=66

    test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=64K-64K/64K-64K/64K-64K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
    fio-2.16
    Starting 2 processes
    Jobs: 2 (f=2): [m(2)] [100.0% done] [21077KB/9033KB/0KB /s] [329/141/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=1785: Mon Apr  3 16:55:52 2017
      read : io=344576KB, bw=7920.8KB/s, iops=123, runt= 43503msec
      write: io=179712KB, bw=4131.3KB/s, iops=64, runt= 43503msec
      cpu          : usr=0.26%, sys=0.80%, ctx=7493, majf=0, minf=10
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.2%, 32=0.4%, >=64=99.2%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=5384/w=2808/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=1786: Mon Apr  3 16:55:52 2017
      read : io=349888KB, bw=8048.3KB/s, iops=125, runt= 43474msec
      write: io=174400KB, bw=4011.7KB/s, iops=62, runt= 43474msec
      cpu          : usr=0.21%, sys=0.85%, ctx=7543, majf=0, minf=9
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.2%, 32=0.4%, >=64=99.2%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=5467/w=2725/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    
    Run status group 0 (all jobs):
       READ: io=694464KB, aggrb=15963KB/s, minb=7920KB/s, maxb=8048KB/s, mint=43474msec, maxt=43503msec
      WRITE: io=354112KB, aggrb=8139KB/s, minb=4011KB/s, maxb=4131KB/s, mint=43474msec, maxt=43503msec
    
    Disk stats (read/write):
      vda: ios=10843/5494, merge=0/0, ticks=2896052/2619728, in_queue=5536348, util=99.94%
    

    download speeds

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    CPU model            : Common KVM processor
    Number of cores      : 1
    CPU frequency        : 2666.760 MHz
    Total amount of ram  : 2004 MB
    Total amount of swap : 1143 MB
    System uptime        : 0days, 0:14:56
    Load average         : 0,07, 0,26, 0,18
    OS                   : Debian GNU/Linux 9
    Arch                 : x86_64 (64 Bit)
    Kernel               : 4.9.0-2-amd64
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Node Name           IPv4 address        Download Speed
    CacheFly            205.234.175.175     83,0MB/s
    Vultr, Tokyo, JP        108.61.201.151      3,08MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP       106.187.96.148      8,92MB/s
    DO, Bangalore, IN       139.59.44.249       7,50MB/s
    Softlayer, Chennai, IN      169.38.65.84        4,38MB/s
    Vultr, Singapore, SG        45.32.100.168       3,66MB/s
    DO, Singapore, SG       128.199.210.182     5,89MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG       139.162.23.4        3,99MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG    119.81.28.170       7,08MB/s
    Leaseweb, Singapore, SG     103.254.153.18      7,73MB/s
    Softlayer, HongKong, CN     119.81.130.170      3,60MB/s
    Leaseweb, HongKong, CN      43.249.36.49        4,58MB/s
    Vultr, Sydney, AUS      108.61.212.117      2,49MB/s
    Softlayer, Sydney, AUS      168.1.1.212     4,00MB/s
    Softlayer, Melbourne, AUS   168.1.65.244        4,30MB/s
    Tele2, Gothenberg, SE       90.130.74.151       22,5MB/s
    Tele2, Kista, SE        90.130.74.149       22,8MB/s
    Softlayer, Milan, IT        159.122.128.84      30,0MB/s
    Prometeus, Milan, IT        37.247.53.10        50,8MB/s
    Tele2, Riga, LV     90.130.74.113       21,1MB/s
    Tele2, Vilnius, LT      90.130.74.117       21,0MB/s
    Server.LU, Luxembourg, LU   94.242.192.2        53,4MB/s
    Tele2, Frankfurt, DE        90.130.74.155       47,6MB/s
    Vultr, Frankfurt, DE        108.61.210.117      54,3MB/s
    Linode, Frankfurt, DE       139.162.130.8       14,7MB/s
    Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE    159.122.69.4        52,3MB/s
    Leaseweb, Frankfurt, DE     37.58.58.140        11,5MB/s
    DO, Frankfurt, DE       46.101.201.140      62,8MB/s
    Vultr, Paris, FR        108.61.209.127      35,5MB/s
    OVH, Gravelines, FR     5.196.90.200        19,1MB/s
    OVH, Strasbourg, FR     5.135.128.81        7,06MB/s
    OVH, Roubaix, FR        188.165.12.106      7,96MB/s
    Online.Net, Paris, FR       62.210.18.40        59,0MB/s
    Tele2, Amsterdam, NL        90.130.74.153       41,5MB/s
    Vultr, Amsterdam, NL        108.61.198.102      36,5MB/s
    DO 2, Amsterdam, NL     146.185.152.145     71,3MB/s
    DO 3, Amsterdam, NL     178.62.219.145      78,3MB/s
    Leaseweb, Amsterdam, NL     5.79.108.33     28,2MB/s
    i3d, Amsterdam, NL      213.163.76.200      33,2MB/s
    Vultr, London, UK       108.61.196.101      37,6MB/s
    DO, London, UK      188.166.152.227     31,7MB/s
    Linode, London, UK      176.58.107.39       44,3MB/s
    Softlayer, London, UK       5.10.97.132     52,1MB/s
    Softlayer, Mexico, MX       169.57.4.116        6,27MB/s
    Softlayer, Brazil, BR       169.57.128.148      4,79MB/s
    DO 1, NYC, USA      67.205.188.39       9,60MB/s
    DO 2, NYC, USA      162.243.9.77        10,3MB/s
    DO 3, NYC, USA      138.197.20.252      25,7MB/s
    Vultr, New Jersey, USA      108.61.149.182      1,52MB/s
    Linode, Newark, USA     50.116.57.237       10,2MB/s
    Vultr, Illinois, USA        107.191.51.12       6,77MB/s
    Vultr, Atlanta, USA     108.61.193.166      6,60MB/s
    Linode, Atlanta, USA        50.116.39.117       6,09MB/s
    Vultr, Miami, USA       104.156.244.232     7,37MB/s
    Vultr, Washington, USA      108.61.194.105      5,19MB/s
    Softlayer, Seattle, USA     67.228.112.250      8,98MB/s
    Leaseweb, Washington, USA   108.59.10.97        6,51MB/s
    Vultr, Dallas, USA      108.61.224.175      5,79MB/s
    Linode, Dallas, USA     50.116.25.154       7,51MB/s
    Softlayer, Dallas, USA      173.192.68.18       11,0MB/s
    Leaseweb, Dallas, USA       209.58.153.1        6,27MB/s
    Vultr, Los Angeles, USA     108.61.219.200      6,61MB/s
    DO, San Francisco, USA      138.68.237.46       6,04MB/s
    DO, San Francisco, USA      192.241.209.37      15,6MB/s
    Linode, Fremont, USA        50.116.14.9     2,89MB/s
    Leaseweb, San Francisco, USA    209.58.135.187      663KB/s
    DO, Toronto, CA     138.197.135.163     7,95MB/s
    OVH, Beauharnois, CA        192.99.19.165       2,37MB/s
    EastLink, Canada, CA        24.222.0.194        5,18MB/s
    Softlayer, Montreal, CA     169.54.124.180      9,59MB/s
    

    of course will monitor the routing during the next days and maybe even speak with support if they can do anything about it, but I doubt the latter...

    Thanked by 2ucxo pechspilz
  • FalzoFalzo Member

    lets add another one to the game ;-)

    @dediserve has been very helpful and accomodating to me for getting a service in their Vienna location - I simply couldn't let that pass. thanks again!
    also IP geolocation looks promising, server benchmarks below ;-)

    sadly I see the same routing issue to specific destinations in FRA like with transcom before. if doing a traceroute or mtr to that service it runs to anexia in FRA and jumps from there to ixreach.com which takes it all the way to amsterdam first and from there back to FRA which simply doubles the latency for nothing at all >8/

    I made contact with their support and also did so with transcom about it, seems to be somewhat specific depending on the destination IP/subnet and involving ixreach (cns) as upstream because to other services I have in FFM the routing seems to be direct as expected.

    Can't tell yet if anyone is able to do something about this at all, but really appreciate their efforts ;-)

    as promised, benchmarks for dediserve 1GB KVM in vienna:

    geekbench https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/2371398

    dd if=/dev/zero of=tmpfile bs=64k count=32k conv=fdatasync
    2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB, 2.0 GiB) copied, 4.84867 s, 443 MB/s

    ioping -c 10 .

    --- . (ext3 /dev/vda1) ioping statistics ---
    9 requests completed in 7.79 ms, 36 KiB read, 1.15 k iops, 4.51 MiB/s
    generated 10 requests in 9.00 s, 40 KiB, 1 iops, 4.44 KiB/s
    min/avg/max/mdev = 291.1 us / 866.0 us / 4.75 ms / 1.37 ms
    

    fio --randrepeat=1 --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --gtod_reduce=1 --name=test --filename=test --bs=64k --iodepth=64 --size=1G --numjobs=4 --readwrite=randrw --rwmixread=66

    test: (g=0): rw=randrw, bs=64K-64K/64K-64K/64K-64K, ioengine=libaio, iodepth=64
    fio-2.16
    Starting 4 processes
    Jobs: 4 (f=4): [m(4)] [100.0% done] [1055MB/537.6MB/0KB /s] [16.9K/8601/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s]
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=3297: Tue Apr  4 16:06:54 2017
      read : io=694208KB, bw=146953KB/s, iops=2296, runt=  4724msec
      write: io=354368KB, bw=75014KB/s, iops=1172, runt=  4724msec
      cpu          : usr=3.22%, sys=7.28%, ctx=10685, majf=0, minf=9
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.2%, >=64=99.6%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=10847/w=5537/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=3298: Tue Apr  4 16:06:54 2017
      read : io=698176KB, bw=149056KB/s, iops=2328, runt=  4684msec
      write: io=350400KB, bw=74808KB/s, iops=1168, runt=  4684msec
      cpu          : usr=2.99%, sys=7.52%, ctx=10674, majf=0, minf=8
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.2%, >=64=99.6%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=10909/w=5475/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=3299: Tue Apr  4 16:06:54 2017
      read : io=689600KB, bw=146102KB/s, iops=2282, runt=  4720msec
      write: io=358976KB, bw=76054KB/s, iops=1188, runt=  4720msec
      cpu          : usr=2.37%, sys=7.97%, ctx=10552, majf=0, minf=7
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.2%, >=64=99.6%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=10775/w=5609/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=3300: Tue Apr  4 16:06:54 2017
      read : io=693248KB, bw=146906KB/s, iops=2295, runt=  4719msec
      write: io=355328KB, bw=75297KB/s, iops=1176, runt=  4719msec
      cpu          : usr=2.80%, sys=7.55%, ctx=10696, majf=0, minf=7
      IO depths    : 1=0.1%, 2=0.1%, 4=0.1%, 8=0.1%, 16=0.1%, 32=0.2%, >=64=99.6%
         submit    : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0%
         complete  : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.1%, >=64=0.0%
         issued    : total=r=10832/w=5552/d=0, short=r=0/w=0/d=0, drop=r=0/w=0/d=0
         latency   : target=0, window=0, percentile=100.00%, depth=64
    
    Run status group 0 (all jobs):
       READ: io=2710.2MB, aggrb=587475KB/s, minb=146101KB/s, maxb=149055KB/s, mint=4684msec, maxt=4724msec
      WRITE: io=1385.9MB, aggrb=300396KB/s, minb=74807KB/s, maxb=76054KB/s, mint=4684msec, maxt=4724msec
    
    Disk stats (read/write):
      vda: ios=42027/21496, merge=0/0, ticks=323140/157948, in_queue=481448, util=97.49%
    

    download speeds

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    CPU model            : QEMU Virtual CPU version (cpu64-rhel6)
    Number of cores      : 1
    CPU frequency        : 2399.998 MHz
    Total amount of ram  : 989 MB
    Total amount of swap : 1023 MB
    System uptime        : 0days, 3:8:8
    Load average         : 0.20, 0.13, 0.04
    OS                   : Debian GNU/Linux 9
    Arch                 : x86_64 (64 Bit)
    Kernel               : 4.9.0-2-amd64
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Node Name           IPv4 address        Download Speed
    CacheFly            205.234.175.175     33.7MB/s
    Vultr, Tokyo, JP        108.61.201.151      2.04MB/s
    Linode, Tokyo, JP       106.187.96.148      1.99MB/s
    DO, Bangalore, IN       139.59.44.249       4.43MB/s
    Softlayer, Chennai, IN      169.38.65.84        5.06MB/s
    Vultr, Singapore, SG        45.32.100.168       3.91MB/s
    DO, Singapore, SG       128.199.210.182     2.45MB/s
    Linode, Singapore, SG       139.162.23.4        2.42MB/s
    Softlayer, Singapore, SG    119.81.28.170       3.07MB/s
    Leaseweb, Singapore, SG     103.254.153.18      5.04MB/s
    Softlayer, HongKong, CN     119.81.130.170      3.80MB/s
    Leaseweb, HongKong, CN      43.249.36.49        2.92MB/s
    Vultr, Sydney, AUS      108.61.212.117      1.77MB/s
    Softlayer, Sydney, AUS      168.1.1.212     2.93MB/s
    Softlayer, Melbourne, AUS   168.1.65.244        2.80MB/s
    Tele2, Gothenberg, SE       90.130.74.151       6.33MB/s
    Tele2, Kista, SE        90.130.74.149       9.26MB/s
    Softlayer, Milan, IT        159.122.128.84      16.9MB/s
    Prometeus, Milan, IT        37.247.53.10        13.4MB/s
    Tele2, Riga, LV     90.130.74.113       10.5MB/s
    Tele2, Vilnius, LT      90.130.74.117       11.6MB/s
    Server.LU, Luxembourg, LU   94.242.192.2        13.5MB/s
    Tele2, Frankfurt, DE        90.130.74.155       21.8MB/s
    Vultr, Frankfurt, DE        108.61.210.117      20.9MB/s
    Linode, Frankfurt, DE       139.162.130.8       16.9MB/s
    Softlayer, Frankfurt, DE    159.122.69.4        9.85MB/s
    Leaseweb, Frankfurt, DE     37.58.58.140        35.5MB/s
    DO, Frankfurt, DE       46.101.201.140      20.8MB/s
    Vultr, Paris, FR        108.61.209.127      16.6MB/s
    OVH, Gravelines, FR     5.196.90.200        13.2MB/s
    OVH, Strasbourg, FR     5.135.128.81        13.0MB/s
    OVH, Roubaix, FR        188.165.12.106      16.3MB/s
    Online.Net, Paris, FR       62.210.18.40        23.2MB/s
    Tele2, Amsterdam, NL        90.130.74.153       17.4MB/s
    Vultr, Amsterdam, NL        108.61.198.102      8.56MB/s
    DO 2, Amsterdam, NL     146.185.152.145     26.2MB/s
    DO 3, Amsterdam, NL     178.62.219.145      25.0MB/s
    Leaseweb, Amsterdam, NL     5.79.108.33     30.7MB/s
    i3d, Amsterdam, NL      213.163.76.200      6.49MB/s
    Vultr, London, UK       108.61.196.101      7.16MB/s
    DO, London, UK      188.166.152.227     14.0MB/s
    Linode, London, UK      176.58.107.39       11.4MB/s
    Softlayer, London, UK       5.10.97.132     23.9MB/s
    Softlayer, Mexico, MX       169.57.4.116        3.12MB/s
    Softlayer, Brazil, BR       169.57.128.148      3.52MB/s
    DO 1, NYC, USA      67.205.188.39       4.15MB/s
    DO 2, NYC, USA      162.243.9.77        6.42MB/s
    DO 3, NYC, USA      138.197.20.252      9.12MB/s
    Vultr, New Jersey, USA      108.61.149.182      3.20MB/s
    Linode, Newark, USA     50.116.57.237       5.35MB/s
    Vultr, Illinois, USA        107.191.51.12       5.94MB/s
    Vultr, Atlanta, USA     108.61.193.166      3.37MB/s
    Linode, Atlanta, USA        50.116.39.117       7.07MB/s
    Vultr, Miami, USA       104.156.244.232     3.69MB/s
    Vultr, Washington, USA      108.61.194.105      3.44MB/s
    Softlayer, Seattle, USA     67.228.112.250      4.75MB/s
    Leaseweb, Washington, USA   108.59.10.97        5.97MB/s
    Vultr, Dallas, USA      108.61.224.175      4.01MB/s
    Linode, Dallas, USA     50.116.25.154       3.42MB/s
    Softlayer, Dallas, USA      173.192.68.18       7.49MB/s
    Leaseweb, Dallas, USA       209.58.153.1        4.72MB/s
    Vultr, Los Angeles, USA     108.61.219.200      3.94MB/s
    DO, San Francisco, USA      138.68.237.46       4.40MB/s
    DO, San Francisco, USA      192.241.209.37      6.18MB/s
    Linode, Fremont, USA        50.116.14.9     2.96MB/s
    Leaseweb, San Francisco, USA    209.58.135.187      2.94MB/s
    DO, Toronto, CA     138.197.135.163     4.25MB/s
    OVH, Beauharnois, CA        192.99.19.165       3.05MB/s
    EastLink, Canada, CA        24.222.0.194        3.87MB/s
    Softlayer, Montreal, CA     169.54.124.180      5.81MB/s
    
  • ucxoucxo Member
    edited April 2017

    @Falzo Can you check if the providers you've tried offer a /64 IPv6 per VM as they should?

    I'd like to run a mailserver in AT or CH and for that it's really essential.

  • kh81kh81 Member
    edited April 2017

    @kcaj said:

    hawc said: @kcaj could probably help

    Thanks Harry!

    The offers on vps247.com seem to fit your requirements.

    Test files

    If anybody wants a little credit to get them going, signup and drop me a PM with your email address.

    Why is the routing from Vienna (Liberty Global) to M247 Vienna so bad? Via UK??

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • FalzoFalzo Member

    @kh81 said:

    @kcaj said:

    hawc said: @kcaj could probably help

    Thanks Harry!

    The offers on vps247.com seem to fit your requirements.

    Test files

    If anybody wants a little credit to get them going, signup and drop me a PM with your email address.

    Why is the routing from Vienna to M247 Vienna (Liberty Global) so bad? Via UK??

    that of course seems very odd :/ yet their routing from vienna or zurich to frankfurt seems to be working flawless - which leaves me with either a screwed up routing for clients in AT to vienna itself but a good one to FRA or maybe a better routing to my VM inside of AT but a bad one to the service in FRA...

    @kh81 if I send you two IPs via PM would you mind tracing them from that connection in vienna you used for that check and sending me the results?

  • kh81kh81 Member
    edited April 2017

    Falzo said: @kh81 if I send you two IPs via PM would you mind tracing them from that connection in vienna you used for that check and sending me the results?

    Sure, it's my residential connection though. I'm pretty sure they screwed up the routing for actual Austrian users.

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • FalzoFalzo Member
    edited April 2017

    @ucxo said:
    @Falzo Can you check if the providers you've tried offer a /64 IPv6 per VM as they should?

    I'd like to run a mailserver in AT or CH and for that it's really essential.

    with vps247 there is a checkbox which should assign you IPv6, it shows something like that afterwards:

    IPv6
    First Usable 2001:db7:39::30
    Last Usable 2001:db7:39::3f
    Subnet /64
    Gateway 2001:db7:39::1
    

    haven't done any further checks yet...

    with transcom there is also a IPv6 assigned at least from their billing panel it says something like

    2a07:7c50:1fa1:3a42::/64

    though as mentioned they are using plain proxmox, so you would need to set it up inside the guest yourself, which i haven't done so far and therefore can't reliably tell if and how that might work out.

    with @dediserve I don't see anything regarding IPv6 ... but you probably could ask just via pm or herein ;-)

  • @Falzo Can I find a VPS Swiss locally based yearly $30 budget? Some time CoinsHosts was offers. It was about $32. Not right now.

  • FalzoFalzo Member

    @ansiklopedi said:
    @Falzo Can I find a VPS Swiss locally based yearly $30 budget? Some time CoinsHosts was offers. It was about $32. Not right now.

    didn't stumble about anything like that yet, but ruled out esp. openvz before...
    so maybe there are options I simply haven't taken into account for my needs.
    as far as I can tell sinavps you already mentioned seems to come close with their smallest ovz offer, which is 33CHF per year.

  • WilliamWilliam Member
    edited April 2017

    kh81 said: Why is the routing from Vienna (Liberty Global)

    Because you are using UPC. No, really, that is the sole reason. UPC does not peer and sells 8EUR/Mbit transit. Complain at UPC, not the other side. M247 has routing weirdness in AT, yes, but this is not one of them. No VIX for Hotze would be one, or the FRA/AMS pref. for Telekom.

    Falzo said: that of course seems very odd :/

    This is absolutely normal. UPC as peer only gives you OTHER countries local, for anything else you need at least 3 locations on 2 continents and 10GE traffic volume. All documented as PDF by Aorta/LibertyGlobal.

    If you want UPC, just like DTAG, you will pay a premium or find a specific (eg. singlehomed) ISP in (mostly) Eastern Europe.

  • KevinjoaKevinjoa Member
    edited April 2017

    @William
    LibertyGlobal (unitymedia in west germany) works fine for me with at least cogent, level 3, telia and ntt from what I tested. :)

    So even if LibertyGlobal is a big company as home isp like DTAG it does have better peerings most of the time for me.

  • internex.at has UPC upstream

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • kh81kh81 Member
    edited April 2017

    @William said:

    kh81 said: Why is the routing from Vienna (Liberty Global)

    Because you are using UPC. No, really, that is the sole reason. UPC does not peer and sells 8EUR/Mbit transit. Complain at UPC, not the other side. M247 has routing weirdness in AT, yes, but this is not one of them. No VIX for Hotze would be one, or the FRA/AMS pref. for Telekom.

    It still isn't necessary to route via London. They don't even need to directly peer with UPC either.

    All the others manage to do it, they should be able to do so too. Also, there doesn't seem to be a problem with Liberty Global in Germany.

  • Kevinjoa said: So even if LibertyGlobal is a big company as home isp like DTAG it does have better peerings most of the time for me.

    What you describe is transit, peering is one AS away only. LG has around 1/4th of the DTAG revenue but is more profitable. Both are horrible in peering and both are "wannabe" Tier1s. DTAG has the better network, by far - LG/UPC congestion is inside their network mostly (transport/L2), DTAG is on the edge (transit/L3).

    This is due as LG is based on what they bought and cheap additions (even if this means far away/around) while DTAG leverages what they have and old contracts (eg. with A1 for balkan bound). LG essentially has a problem moving traffic to major POPs, DTAG is a step further and has now issues getting rid of it entirely.

    LG is shareholder controlled, DTAG has a more complicated structure which makes short-high-profit investments rather rare while LG risks and profits for the shareholders (not for the customers however). DTAG on the other hand offers by state investment a bit more security on existence.

    Back to your traffic - LG, or rather UPC as all of the EU network is managed from Vienna & AMS anyway, is slow in reaction and pretty useless on congestion, i just want to remind of the 3year+ route of UPC->Cogent via NYC which is still sometimes the case.

    It is also extremely unfair from them to sell transit for their inbound traffic and no customer should support that - ultimately at one point they WILL risk too much and get degraded by Netflix/Google or someone else major if they try to pressure $$$ out of them.

    Thanked by 2Kevinjoa kh81
  • WilliamWilliam Member
    edited April 2017

    kh81 said: All the others manage to do it, they should be able to do so too

    UPC/LG does interesting agreements which disfavour large ISPs - You need to use what you set up with them or loose it, plus they get to decide where you settle your traffic:

    http://www.libertyglobal.com/oo-bs-settled-peering-policy.html

    Relevant is here "Requirements for Global Peering in Europe", if the M247 agreement was LDN/AMS/FRA as primary their location in VIE needs to use that also.

    The routing here is weird but as i see UPC actually going in to M247 in Vienna this sounds very much like a policy thing or crap config, the link is after all there.

    It's also not "everyone", a few DCs in Austria (and a lot of small ISPs) have no direct/upstream UPC and cross other EU cities - EDIS is only an exception as Retn has old peering agreements with UPC either, else would use DE as Atrato has nothing local.

      1. AS6830  212-186-236-41.static.upcbusiness.at (212.186.236.41)  30.0%    3     7    10   0.4   0.3   0.4   0.5   0.0   0.4  0.0  0.1  0.2  0.4
      2. AS???   ???                                                    100.0   10     0    10   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0
      3. AS6830  84.116.5.33                                             0.0%    0    10    10   9.2   8.4  12.7  22.2   5.8  11.7  0.0  2.8 13.8 22.2
      4. AS6830  84.116.228.34                                           0.0%    0    10    10  46.5  33.9  39.4  48.6   5.7  39.0  0.6  4.3 12.6 33.2
      5. AS6830  at-vie15a-rd1-ae26-2032.aorta.net (84.116.228.85)       0.0%    0    10    10  33.8  33.8  39.6  50.4   6.2  39.2  0.7  4.5 11.9 35.7
      6. AS???   ???                                                    100.0   10     0    10   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0
      7. AS6830  84.116.135.42                                           0.0%    0    10    10  33.7  33.7  38.7  49.9   6.1  38.3  2.6  6.1 16.1 45.1
      8. AS9009  185.94.195.96                                           0.0%    0    10    10  40.8  33.0  41.0  69.2  10.7  40.0  1.1  9.4 36.2 65.6
    

    Point is if you are on VIX you get a session with A1 even over the RS, same as with the smaller ones - UPC will let you hanging.

    If i offer to peer and they decline i am not responsible for the re-routing, can't offer more than that, i (as many others) will not pay the extortion prices they want - if backhaul to AMS and peering there is 3x cheaper than transit in Vienna... yea.

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • UPC has a Private Network Interconnect ( PNI ) with M247 in London, therefore prefering London over regional IXs/Transit. If you had BGP with M247, you can fix it by not announcing to the IPN through proper BGP Communities. Clearly, it's UPCs fault though and not M247, as they just announce to them. Blame UPC to set proper preferences within their network. ;-)

Sign In or Register to comment.