"Don't go with virtual hosting"

from Brett's 26 steps article

[ddd5280]

This is from Brett's 26 steps article:

"Don't go with virtual hosting - go with a stand alone IP."

I didn't go with a host that has an IP address for my site. Brett does not say why this is a bad thing - can anyone tell me why?

[bakedjake]

It's the whole bad neighborhood thing - it doesn't have any direct correlation to rankings, but it's not the best idea to have your website hosted on the same IP address as a bunch of (email) spammers.

That said, there are lots of good reasons to have a unique IP. The biggest one is SSL.

FYI: Yahoo has blocked entire class C blocks in the past, so do check out your neighborhood.

[ddd5280]

Is there some tool i can use to check out if the neighborhood i am on is a bad one?

[bakedjake]

Check NANAE on Usenet, check out the various email spam blacklists, the reverse IP tool on whois dot sc.

If you don't discover anything from one of those methods, you're probably ok.

[voices]

So there is nothing wrong with virtual hosting then? Just find a good host that doesn't allow spamming.

[dakman]

pretty much all the virtual hosts allow you to buy your own static ip for private SSL and any other purpose. my host is giving me one for 2 bucks a month soon... so whats wrong with virtual hosting if the virtual hosting company provides a static ip for your account?

[Wail]

There are still issues with a static IP address. Your nameserver might be used by spammers too.

Google's denied punishing virtual hosts in anyway but they have a patent application which states how they would examine your nameserver.

In believe that it's more a matter of choosing a good host than of choosing a good IP address.