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.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
I use Monero which is inherently private, so no issues with blockchain tracking.
Are you just looking for a France vps hosting provider?
Any hosting provider with unmetered bandwidth, good upstreams, at least 50 GB storage, at least 4 GB RAM, and at least 2 vCPUs for a similar price would work. VeryCloud just looked particularly good because it also came with 8 GB RAM.
ah ok, It is hard to find something like that for the similar price. It is often more expensive like 55 eur to 60 eur per year
I see that they offer this:
2 vCores (Processeur Intel Xeon Gold 6138)
・6 Go RAM DDR4 ECC
・32 Go SSD Intel DC
for 45.80€/y. How did you get more RAM and SSD?
https://manager.verycloud.fr/cart.php?a=confproduct&i=0&language=english
They confirmed they can do crypto, awesome!
Payment sent via ticket just now.
i have to admit i was fully expecting disappointment but i'm glad it worked out after all that legwork
I feel like I must be the first person to even use the VPS lol. The templates are broken (IPv6 support is broken on both Debian and Ubuntu, yet DNS is set to use IPv6), and there's a separate virtual interface for IPv4 and IPv6 rather than both being on the same interface. Took a little bit of troubleshooting before finding the correct configuration (what was displayed on the dashboard gave the wrong subnet mask and the wrong gateway). Good connectivity when configured right, though.
And whenever it reboots, even from software, the VM gets reset to the "stopped" state and must be manually started up from the dashboard. I'll open a ticket for that soon.
Specs are not as advertised, in both a good and bad way (CPUs are faster, RAM is less, storage is less, network is faster).
Copy of my fresh YABS from https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/4832543/#Comment_4832543:
Provider: VeryCloud (https://verycloud.fr)
Location: Paris, France
Price: €4.49/month (VPS KVM SSD - KVM-STARTER tarrif, but see "Other info")
IPv4 upstream(s): SERVERD (AS62000) - https://bgp.tools/prefix/82.22.2.0/24#connectivity
IPv6 upstream(s): SERVERD (AS62000), Cogent (AS174) - https://bgp.tools/prefix/2a10:4646:2e0::/44#connectivity
Other info: IPv6 config broken on templates; specs not as advertised (more bandwidth, faster CPU, less RAM, less SSD)
Output of
lscpu(click to expand)Output of
lshw(click to expand)Output of
taskset -c 0 cpuid -1r(click to expand)So apparently their 2c8g64g was from 2025. After paying, I only got 2c6g32g. That's not a huge deal to me because it's still quite good for the price, but it does mean that they provided less resources after payment than advertised. They said they'd correct the price so hopefully no one else makes the same mistake.
And they can't (or don't know how?) to configure Proxmox correctly:
I suppose it's time for me to set up kexec-based reboot then! I think virtual NICs can handle that.
Definitely not a premium provider, but I don't feel ripped off at least. If the price were higher, I might.
it's still a good deal yea but i bet you're going to trip over more interesting shit, please keep us updated if you feel like it!
at least you got 10Gbps uplink - assuming it was a correct benchmark... not just 100Mbps... I wonder what's the monthly xfer limit...?
FUP 100 TB/month, but according to someone else who used the service, they'll throttle it earlier. I definitely won't need 100 TB/month though.
@forest
Sorry, but what a shit show (after looking so good at first glance). Plus they seem to be quite clueless.
Anyway, it's your server and you must - and will I hope! - be happy with it.
well, he worked hard for us all... so we can just order and know before what we are getting
Oh shit...
My IP is 82.22.2.48 btw, not 82.22.77.2... And yes, this is reflected on both interfaces.
Avoid this provider!
LOL. Sounds like you're going to improve their network
If they listen to me, yes. I sent them:
But I'm not too confident that they'll fix it. The unicast flooding issue also occurs with iHostArt btw lol
They can also fix the reboot issue with
qm set <VMID> -reboot 1.So, do "we" know more now, really? Or is it rather that now we have yet more evidence for what was recognizable earlier, namely: what a shit show!
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate and value @forest's ... uhm ... curiosity and continuing efforts, but at the end of the day it boils down to "what a shit show!" (jsg version) and "Avoid this provider!" (forest version).
But yes, I still wish for forest getting his TOR server in FR working, not because I'm a TOR fan (I'm not), or because I'm a fan of that incompetent provider (I'm certainly not), but because I like forest.
It's certainly interesting to find out all the little bugs that various no-name providers have in their configuration. Hopefully they do end up fixing it. The ticket I opened has been changed to "in progress" and I suspect they're looking into fixing it. I do hope that, ultimately, they'll end up becoming a good provider. The support is answered directly by the owner it seems, and he is very friendly. The provider has potential but is certainly not there yet.
I'm curious, do you dislike Tor or is it just not something you really care about?
The main reason I haven't set up Tor on that provider yet isn't that it doesn't work per se, but because the L2 leak is a security issue. It would allow someone else to buy a VPS on the same VLAN and they could potentially monitor all incoming connections to my relay. Although they would never be able to read the plaintext traffic due to encryption, they could get timing information and determine the IPs of relays (or clients) connecting to it.
im the oracle
I had this issue with LiteServer. They solved it by moving me to another hv😂
It probably wasn't even really solved if that's all they did, there were just no non-learned MACs on that particular hypervisor that you saw when you ran a test even if there was no L2 isolation. A lot of times you'll have to run a tcpdump for a long time to start seeing it. And you'll often find a lot of control-plane frames leaking out too.
So far, this problem (in varying degrees of seriousness) is observed on SVR4U (though they're working on it), LakeNetworks, iHostArt, MetroVPS, and 4VPS. But I only tested about half my fleet, so others may be there.
A good filter to run overnight as a test:
I noticed because my bandwidth allocation of my idler was all used up
And just like you bunch of Instagram etc in incoming traffic
Yeah, I don’t think they solved it, more so just fixed it for me