Howdy, Stranger!

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


Rapidswitch Maidenhead, United Kingdom LEB annual plan offers?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Rapidswitch Maidenhead, United Kingdom LEB annual plan offers?

pubcrawlerpubcrawler Banned
edited January 2013 in General

Anyone have an annual paid plan available out of Rapidswitch in Maidenhead, UK?

Something like the BuyVM and RamNode style smaller annual plans.

«1

Comments

  • JacobJacob Member
    edited January 2013

    Not rapidswitch, but another UK DC, $15/year.

  • @pubcrawler Have a look at AnnualVPS

  • SpiritSpirit Member
    edited January 2013

    OpenITC (XenVZ) had recently £15 GBP per 12 months Rapidswitch KVM offer but I am not sure if it's still available. You should ask Sean.
    And are still really cheap Httpzoom OpenVZ (and some Xen) yearly offers at LET in same DC http://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/3556/high-bandwidth-openvz-from-7.50-year-high-quality-hardware-great-customer-reviews-http-zoom#Item_23

  • I can do that, pm me what you need :)

  • mikhomikho Member, Host Rep

    I think minivps is in Maidenhead.

  • @Jack,

    Sure folks enjoy larger plans :)

    Looks like the annual for the 512MB is $40. That's a big price difference.

  • JacobJacob Member
    edited January 2013

    Coz' 15 bucks isn't viable, for most... :-)

    @pubcrawler said: Looks like the annual for the 512MB is $40

  • $15 is alright to throw away.

    $40 gets into thought process, what ifs, etc.

    If I bought 30 plans at $40 = $1200 / year

    At the lower $15 = $450 /year.

    One is $100/mo compared to $30/mo.

    $15 plans make it alright for providers to take runners, problems within the year, etc. $40, nah not as understanding.

    That said, I buy both big plans and small plans. The bigger plans are highly selective on provider and location. Or a project has a must-have something (more disk, more RAM or direct peering).

  • Are you just looking for a VPS with fastest route to USA, or globally?

    @pubcrawler said: direct peering

  • We are doubling up on things. Needed another location in Europe (have only currently). In case of outage, we would be sending correctly geolocated users to the US, which adds up on latency. Failures happen, so trying to get ahead of the next outage.

    Connectivity to the US is always important as it is where we base things. Emphasis on US east coast lately. Still dealing in Chicago, Kansas City and Dallas, but lesser so these days. Weeding out duplication and non-diverse networks (i.e. don't need 3 providers on Colocrossing or 3 providers with the HE + Cogent blend).

    Global fastest route? Always looking for a provider that can reach Asia and the US in respectably low latency. Would make my life a tad easier :) For now we sprinkle nodes all over the place and audit them now and then and cut ones haven't been happy with for whatever reason and mix in new ones.

    Direct peering is something we are fond of, especially public exchanges. But the many implementations of such seen to date are spotty/random/often error prone.

    Liking Peer1 in Montreal for that though. Their method of putting end routers out there in key big exchange areas and backhauling on their own fiber/rented dedicated pipe. That's not direct peering per se, or a different variant.

  • For that you would need someone that has a NTT Blend, or some other good connections to asia.

    @pubcrawler said: Always looking for a provider that can reach Asia and the US in respectably low latency.

    Peer 1 is also expensive, more than $15/year and $40/year for sure. :)

  • Peer 1 is also expensive, more than $15/year and $40/year for sure. :)

    Correct-o-mundo!

    We have a VPS in Asia currently. It is hit and miss on the peering and see a number of places, like namely Australia end up with higher latency than just getting to our US West Coast node.

    Imperfect science at best with this.

    NTT blend, that is something I'll look into going forward and research. Trying to find that peer point in Asia where Australia, India and China all have somewhat low latency and put people there.

  • concerto49concerto49 Member
    edited January 2013

    @pubcrawler said: Trying to find that peer point in Asia where Australia, India and China all have somewhat low latency and put people there.

    That's impossible at least for now. The Australia route to Asia, especially China is horrible and congested. It dies every now and again with very high pings and slow speeds.

    You best bet is Fiberhub, Quadranet, etc...

  • Yeah, I am in Fiberhub. It's fine. But has to be better in Asia with lower latency, even if that means putting nodes in the respective countries.

    Australia has some issue about bandwidth. I don't understand why they aren't better peered to Asia since neighbors...

  • @pubcrawler how do you decide which users goes to which node? Do you have some DNS smartness for this?

  • @pubcrawler said: Australia has some issue about bandwidth. I don't understand why they aren't better peered to Asia since neighbors...

    There are only a rare few submarine cables going out. That's the problem. The 4th submarine cable that was going to the USA got canned 1/2 way into the project due to a lack of funds although large ISPs backed it.

    http://www.submarinecablemap.com/ - you will see that there aren't many and the bandwidth available on those cables are shocking.

    The problem with Australia is sparse population, we're still on ADSL here (Fiber is still building and hence internally we can't get the speed anyway so no one cares) and just there isn't enough interest to build and fund it.

    @pubcrawler said: But has to be better in Asia with lower latency

    Find Quadranet the best to Asia and also Australia then (or Multacom).

  • @rds100,

    how do you decide which users goes to which node? Do you have some DNS smartness for this?

    Geolocation based DNS. Easiest and cheapest implementation to outsource that functionality would be Rage4. There are roll your own solutions that work and other high cost premium providers.

    But, additionally we fiddle on the server layer once users get somewhere to help isolate when people end up on wrong node.

    Mainly used for caching. Static elements as well as some dynamic stuff for set timeouts. Think something like a status page or homepage that gets pummeled.

  • KenshinKenshin Member
    edited January 2013

    @pubcrawler said: NTT blend, that is something I'll look into going forward and research. Trying to find that peer point in Asia where Australia, India and China all have somewhat low latency and put people there.

    NTT in Asia has become bad to worse. SG-HK is 65ms and they tell me it's within SLA, bullshit. My NTT link has gone from 50% usage to 20% because I shifted away all the HK/KR routes due to their high latency. Only thing good is their SG-JP and SG-US but that's about it.

    Curious, but have you tested our network? I can reach India and China pretty decently, Australia is a problem now due to SMW3 cable cut that'll only be fixed in Feb, but there are 1-2 new cables to Perth this year so we should see better connectivity SG-AU end 2013. Bad routing can always be reported, I generally try to optimize what I can fix.

    On the other hand if we're not worth considering, VR has nodes in HK that are worth a shot for CN/AU, and they have IN nodes as well so pretty much covers Asia.

  • @concerto49,

    Thanks for the contribution. That submarine cable map is awesome!

    we're still on ADSL here

    The United States is a big place and most of us still lingering between dialup and DSL type speeds. Well most of the land mass is. The big city dwellers have their fast internet.

    Quadranet the best to Asia and also Australia

    What sort of ping times are you experiencing to Quadranet from Australia? What are others in Asia experiencing to there normally. That's a far distance to float a packet :)

  • ZiggaZigga Member
    edited January 2013

    @pubcrawler said: What sort of ping times are you experiencing to Quadranet from Australia? What are others in Asia experiencing to there normally. That's a far distance to float a packet :)

    160ms+ always :)

  • @pubcrawler said: What sort of ping times are you experiencing to Quadranet from Australia? What are others in Asia experiencing to there normally. That's a far distance to float a packet :)

    The fastest from Sydney is Fiberhub then Quadranet, but barely makes a difference. Quadranet is faster to Asia.

    Ping from Fiberhub / Quadranet to Sydney is ~160ms. As the peering is in Sydney, that's the fastest. Seeing as you've looked at the submarine cables, the next problem is there's a budget ISP by the name to TPG that built a PIPE cable using a different route. It's longer and causes higher pings / slower speeds. TPG and their resellers that route through PIPE get ~200ms.

    Basically there are 3 routes from USA<->Australia
    http://looking-glass.tpgi.com.au/ - via PIPE
    http://looking-glass.iinet.net.au/lg/ - via Telstra Endeavour
    looking-glass.internode.on.net/lg.cgi - via Southern Cross (Optus has a large stake in this)

  • @Kenshin, yeah, we are a customer of yours :)

    Here's what I see and mind you this isn't totally scientific.

    Shanghai, China 63.3ms
    Hong Kong, China 35.4ms
    Melbourne, Australia 361.3ms
    Mumbai, India 68.4ms
    Bangkok, Thailand 31.5ms
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 7.2ms
    Jakarta, Indonesia 13.9ms
    Mumbai, India 59.1ms
    New Delhi, India 80.5ms
    Bangalore, India 40.2ms
    Tokyo, Japan 92.4ms
    Hangzhou, China 65.3ms

    Those times come from just-ping.com directly testing the IP we have.

    Everything looks fine, except Australia and Tokyo.

    I'll PM you about some of the other points and companies you recommended.

  • ZiggaZigga Member
    edited January 2013

    @concerto49 aren't iinet and internode merging networks? Or atleast iinet using internode for some of their backhaul?

    --edit--
    They definitely are.

    Trace from iinet:
    4 xe-7-0-9-10.br1.syd7.on.ii.net (150.101.197.185) [AS 4739] 24 msec 8 msec 0 msec
    5 te0-1-0.bdr1.syd6.internode.on.net (150.101.225.41) [AS 4739] [MPLS: Label 14021 Exp 0] 152 msec 156 msec 152 msec
    6 te0-1-1-2.br2.lax1.on.ii.net (203.16.213.190) [AS 4739] 164 msec 160 msec 164 msec
    7 he.net.coresite.com (206.223.143.122) [AS 9304] 164 msec 156 msec 156 msec

  • 160-200ms is too high. I keep everything under 100ms or I add a local/regional node.

    Some places I don't currently serve or address, like South American and Africa. But those are on the long list for when and if we develop content relative to there.

  • @Zigga said: @concerto49 aren't iinet and internode merging networks? Or atleast iinet using internode for some of their backhaul?

    iiNet currently own Internode :) Enough said.

  • JacobJacob Member
    edited January 2013

    From UK we get 302ms.
    Hangzhou, China: Okay 302.5(ms)

    Rapidswitch have amazing UK, and USA peering but as for asia that is lacking.

    @pubcrawler said: Hangzhou, China 65.3ms

  • @pubcrawler said: 160-200ms is too high. I keep everything under 100ms or I add a local/regional node.

    heh, cloudflare then? They have a local presence in AU.

  • @MikHo said: I think minivps is in Maidenhead.

    We sure are! :)

Sign In or Register to comment.