hosting servers at home

lotas

Good morning.

I have been hosting web servers at home for years now (started back on base NTL connection, now on their 6mb/512k package) but i need more bandwidth. does anyone else do this? are there any ISPs that are extreamly nice for this (large upload bandwidth, nothing about not allowing servers being run in their TOS, no ports blocked, relitivly static IP, etc). I can say NTL are good, no problems so far, but who else? Linksys have a router that can be connected to multiple WAN connections (7 i think is its max) and i would concider getting a few more connections, as long as they are decient.

Thanks in advance.

--Tiernan

Red Alert

IBB haven't noticed i've been running one for over a year. Very few hits though as I mostly just use it myself to read email remotely.

steve-hosting36

With the price of proper colocation these days, hosting at home is a false economy

watty

An email server self hosted is no big deal.

BUT:

A Webserver though is a waste. I get MySQL, CGi, Pearl, 22G storage, Email Server, FTP, Web, subdomains etc etc with 800G per month transfercap all for $60 a year. Three months free on each referral too.

Even my mail server is no longer visible. I get it to pickup from all the email accounts and forward to one isp mailbox (after content filter) that I don't publish the name of. The "secret" public ISP mailbox only gets email from my own server.

This way I don't have to worry about SMTP security or "relay" attempts on my mail server.

Web/ftp/SQL server security is someone elses problem too.

vibe666

pimping again steve?

(just joking, in case you didn't get the smiley).

lotas

steve-hosting36 wrote:

With the price of proper colocation these days, hosting at home is a false economy

well, technically its not. with hosting 365, and any colo places, you pay per machine. also, the default machine type is a 1u box, so you pay 2x the price for it in a 1u rack case then in a standard tower case (just see dell). Also, you pay per machine you have, so the first one is decient price, but between 2 - 4 machines, you pay an arm and a leg for each. things start to even out when you buy whole racks, but that wont be happening for a while. finally, with hosting at home, you would be paying for your broadband connection anyway, so your technically saving money. ok, colo has a lot more bandwidth, and there are advantages, but for the stuff i want to do, its not an option just yet...

in relation to watty's reply:

thats grand, but a few questions. firstly, i run windows servers, MsSQL, Exchange mail, etc. since i own the server and can do anything i want to do, i am pretty much sorted. 22Gb space? i have an 80Gb hdd, and can add more. 800Gb bandwidth: first would you use it, and second, thats only roughtly 2.5mbit/s over the month. my download is 6mb. my 512k upload connection can get me about 160gb a month, if ntl would allow it.... running stuff at home is always handier then hosting (non dedicated servers) or at least i think it can be...

weeder

steve-hosting36 wrote:

With the price of proper colocation these days, hosting at home is a false economy

which is why i wholehartedly recommend oxidehost hi quality serverage*



*I am in no way affiliated with this companyu my mate owns it and am not pimping for him im more so anti pimping steve

whateveryoulike

...

mneylon

weeder wrote:

im more so anti pimping steve

I love it

steve-hosting36

anti-pimping? By pimping another host? That's it, I've now officially heard/seen it all

ozt9vdujny3srf

Enough of les pimping.

And no more "hosting is better" posts. This is equivalent to posting "get linux" on the windows forum.

whateveryoulike

...

WizZard

lotas wrote:

firstly, i run windows servers, MsSQL, Exchange mail, etc. since i own the server and can do anything i want to do, i am pretty much sorted. 22Gb space? i have an 80Gb hdd, and can add more. 800Gb bandwidth: first would you use it, and second, thats only roughtly 2.5mbit/s over the month. my download is 6mb. my 512k upload connection can get me about 160gb a month, if ntl would allow it....

To be quite honest - if you can afford the license fees for MSSQL and Exchange then colo shouldn't be a major expense...

Most routers that can handle multiple WAN links are Failover (FO) only, what you need is load balancing (LB)
Look at m0n0wall or pfSense for a firewall that can handle multiple WAN ports in FO/LB - or consider investing in another, proper, firewall solution that can do the same. m0n0wall and pfSense run on cheap Soekris or Routerboard (IIRC) boxes. One of these coupled with a few WAN links (different providers, naturally) should give you good speeds with fairly constant uptime.

Sparky

whateveryoulike wrote:

Actually I was roffling because I clicked on the link. Obviously I was the only one.

No, you wern't.

ozt9vdujny3srf

Hehe, Roffle indeed.

lotas

WizZard wrote:

Most routers that can handle multiple WAN links are Failover (FO) only, what you need is load balancing (LB)

the linksys router i was looking at is the RV016 (http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_Product_C2&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1115416833102&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper), which does full load balancing and fail over for 7 different WAN connections. the question still is there though: Why providers? IBB seems to have too low a contention ratio, and i have heard bad things about their speeds. any one else?

steve-hosting36

If you are based in Dublin or near a MAN you can get full duplex fiber connections... might be simpler and cheaper than pooling 7 different connections, most of which specify 'no hosting' in their AUP or T&C's

lotas

steve-hosting36 wrote:

If you are based in Dublin or near a MAN you can get full duplex fiber connections... might be simpler and cheaper than pooling 7 different connections, most of which specify 'no hosting' in their AUP or T&C's

how do i find out if i am beside this MAN, and where can i get info? sounds good. might be cool! Wahoo! Fiber to the home baby!

mneylon

lotas wrote:

how do i find out if i am beside this MAN, and where can i get info? sounds good. might be cool! Wahoo! Fiber to the home baby!

Big holes in the roads for a couple of months is a good indicator... or you could look at :
http://www.dcmnr.gov.ie/Communications/Communications+Development/Metropolitan+Area+Networks/

lotas

would they allow homes to connect to this? what kind of speeds are we talking? any ideas of pricing?

WizZard

I've no idea of the MAN pricing, but I did get pricing from NTL for FTTH (well, business) last year. IIRC it was around €18,000pa for a 1MB fibre link, uncontended naturally... You have to pay for the road to be dug up to your door from the main fibre line, and also liase with the local council for regulatory compliance(not sure what this is TBH). NTL said they would swallow that cost themselves if we signed up to a two year contract though.

I doubt that eNet (managers of MANs AFAIK) would sell to home users - too much trouble. But if you have a business you may be in luck.

steve-hosting36

http://www.hosting365.com/solutions-wisp-backhaul.php

Shows the currently live MAN's.

Enet don't sell to home users, but the carriers can, pricing is not cheap but, as WizZard just said, it is premium, SLA covered, uncontended, synchronous bandwidth.

Pricing can be as low as €150 per Mbps per year including the internet transit on larger committs.