Forum Moderators: phranque
but it seems to me that the most important factor in looking for a webhost - be it for a budget package or a dedicated server - is how 'close' that host is to an internet backbone.
naturally the further away the more 'hops' are required to reach your pages.
so how can we find out how close they are, do we have to run a tracert on each host and see what route is taken (from my local machine), this gives a clue i guess, but is there a better way?
so how can we find out how close they are, do we have to run a tracert on each host and see what route is taken (from my local machine), this gives a clue i guess, but is there a better way?
Well, that would work, but it all depends on how many hops you are from "outside" too. And it also depends on your ability to identify the servers that come up in a tracert.
I'd think that it's a pretty safe bet that their site is hosted on their own server. I'd guess it'd be sufficient to ping them and look at the response times. Do this during peak hours of the day. That should give you a pretty good indication of their ability to deliver your page quickly.
Most people that inquire about OUR network ask how we connect, not how far from the backbone. We use a load balancing dual T1 setup for our NOC and don't have any problems.
If you are looking for a "higher end" (more expensive) host where you actually get to talk to a real human sales person, one of the things to ask is for names of other sites they host and maybe even contact information for references. Then you can call up the other sites (during likely busy periods) and see what the response time is.
If you are looking for a "higher end" (more expensive) host where you actually get to talk to a real human sales person, one of the things to ask is for names of other sites they host and maybe even contact information for references. Then you can call up the other sites (during likely busy periods) and see what the response time is.
Have you ever actually tried this? Most web hosting won't give you any information about their customers. Ethical reasons aside, it would typically be a violation of their own privacy policy. I can't say I blame them ... If my host ever tried to use me as a reference, I would tell the caller they sucked and then *I* would switch. I have a business to run, I don't want to be bothered with people asking if my web host is any good.
Have you ever actually tried this?
Yes. I had a discussion with a local, rather expensive, company that provided hosting, web design, and other services. They had a list of clients (maybe they were his relatives!) who they could showcase (probably in return for a discount) and who would serve as references. It's a common practice in most busnesses.
If you go to the Macromedia site you will find customers for their products with links to the websites.
Assume that these are the most satisfied customers, and likely get a discount for allowing their use. However, if you go to the sites and there is a delay in getting them, you know that there may be a problem without even asking the costumer.
Best advice is to check their documentation. If they provide a list of backbones, their capacity to each of them, and ideally the number of seperate telcos they're using to establish that capacity, then you can be fairly certain that they're well enough connectet for most practical purposes.
Any hoster who only connects to one single backbone will have a single point of failure they have no control over themselfes. Any failure at the telco or backbone level will knock their sites offline. If the availability of your site is really critical, then that's not good enough. The top hosters have capacity to up to a dozen backbones, through fiber from seperate telcos, entering the building from different sides, etc... You get the idea. Redundancy is king.
For example, here is Allstream Canada's list:
[bgp.potaroo.net...]
Practically speaking as a guy who does this stuff for a living, proximity to the "backbone" of the Internet doesn't mean as much as diversity to the Internet. Furthermore, all the networking stuff is far less important than the server side, ie systems management and customer service. It doesn't matter if you're plugged right in to an IXP (ie where providers peer at 100mbit or better) if you're running on a crappy server that's overloaded and you have pathetic customer support.
"Tier 1" and such is mostly marketing. You're hearing it because it's easy to say and easy to obtain.
Sean
Example:
tracert www.domain.com
I wish the internet would get organized.
Ugh; tell me about it. In Halifax, one ISP connecting to the other often goes West to Toronto, South to somewhere in the US, hops to another level 1 down south, back to Toronto, on to Halifax again.
A couple judiciously placed fiber-optic cables could save a few petabytes of traffic in my city alone and improve response times for everyone. I don't think the internet could be centrally organized -or that that would be a good thing- but sometimes I wish ISPs would co-operate a bit more.
