Portal Home > Knowledgebase > Articles Database > NAC data center
NAC data center
| Posted by bigfeet, 02-25-2003, 07:10 PM |
| I am looking for reseller web hosting, and was looking at some hosts who co-locate their web servers at the NAC data centre.
I have been reading in this forum that the NAC data center is supposed to provide good clean bandwidth etc, yet whenever I do traceroutes or ping sites that I know are located at the NAC the latency between hops seems very high.
I am located in Australia, but my current host who is in the USA has an average ping response time of 246 ms, whereas sites at the NAC have an average ping response time of 319 ms.
My question is, is this difference in latency going to make much difference to the download time of web pages? Are there any issues at the NAC that would cause their latency to be higher than normal?
Can anybody recomend any good reseller web hosts? They must allow legal adult content, as I have been getting a number of enquiries about hosting adult content. (not porn sites, mainly adult sex shops etc).
Last edited by bigfeet; 02-25-2003 at 07:49 PM.
|
| Posted by Choppy, 02-25-2003, 09:02 PM |
| Hello Bigfeet,
What city are you located in Australia?
We are Australian also and ping times vary depending on what isp you are going through.
Regards
Phillip
|
| Posted by bigfeet, 02-25-2003, 10:24 PM |
| I am located on the Gold Coast, Qld, and my ISP is bigpond Cable. It isn't an ISP issue, because as I said my other web host who is also in the USA has average Ping times of only 246 ms compared to 319 ms for the NAC centre web hosts.
If I do a traceroute, my current web host has 20 hops compared to 18 for the NAC datacentre, but it is still much quicker over the 20 hops because of the much lower latency times.
|
| Posted by Woofcat, 02-25-2003, 10:29 PM |
| west coast pings better from australia than east coast...
|
| Posted by Aussie Bob, 02-26-2003, 03:43 AM |
| I'm from Toowoomba [2 hours north of you] and on BigPond ADSL. I get about 300ms for most traces etc. I don't think you're reeaaaaaaaaaaaally going to notice much difference between 246ms and 300ms.
|
| Posted by AussieHosts, 02-27-2003, 07:00 AM |
| You could look for someone hosting out of somewhere like Atjeu, for peak performance from Australia.
http://tcruskit.telstra.net/cgi-bin/trace?atjeu.com
atjeu.com (12.105.168.254) 201.811 ms 201.858 ms 204.744 ms
If you are focusing on Australian clients/speeds NAC is no good. It pretty much always 300+. United.colo is pretty good too (~220) but they are still on their "P" plates.
Gary
|
| Posted by InvisibleMan, 02-27-2003, 01:27 PM |
| i wouldn't go with NAC they had some terrible downtimes in the past. just a friendly advice
|
| Posted by iWebbers.com, 02-27-2003, 02:01 PM |
| Isn't just DedicatedNow down?
|
| Posted by Aussie Bob, 02-27-2003, 02:15 PM |
| Hmmmm, let me see. There were 2 power related outages this year. There was also the SQL Slammer attack. We had 4 out of 12 servers down during that. Most DCs fared much worse.
|
| Posted by bigfeet, 02-27-2003, 06:47 PM |
| Thanks for the advice everybody. Actually web hosts who are co-located in theplanet look a pretty good bet at the moment.
I get average ping times from there of around 231 ms compared to 319 ms from web hosts co-located at the NAC.
Anybody know any good web hosts co-located at theplanet?
I have a couple in mind. One is dathorn, who seems to have a very good reputation with their clients, and the other eryxma, though I am not too sure about eryxma, they seem to have had lots of downtime in the past 3 months.
The only problem with dathorn is they do not allow legal adult content. This is not an essential requirment, but I get a few enquiries from time to time, and I hate turning customers away. It is only for adult shops, not porn sites.
|
| Posted by Aussie Bob, 02-28-2003, 03:24 AM |
| And this means what exactly to your clients from their location??
|
| Posted by universal2001, 02-28-2003, 04:01 AM |
| hey hey, I'm from the Gold Coast... We are not too far
|
| Posted by kneadingu, 02-28-2003, 04:40 AM |
| I'm constantly on them about improving their average 85ms latency. I have never seen anything over 100ms on any hop out of NAC. I have seen other problems but thats for another thread.
|
| Posted by Aussie Bob, 02-28-2003, 06:49 AM |
| Next time I'm down there, I'll stop by.
|
| Posted by coight, 02-28-2003, 07:26 AM |
| bigfeet try a host at fastservers I get 240ms from WA. 176 using that telstra tool
|
| Posted by forefront, 03-02-2003, 06:09 AM |
| I know that websytz.com, hostforweb.com and acewebnet.com have servers in NAC.
|
| Posted by Melee, 03-02-2003, 04:44 PM |
| isnt there a ping page somewhere that shows the pings to DC's from various locations and there historys.
|
| Posted by ServeForce, 03-03-2003, 04:01 AM |
| Try tracerouting to www.archive.org
I get 170ms from this traceroute page.
My Datacenter is there too, looks pretty good to me heh.
|
| Posted by Jake Weg, 03-03-2003, 02:24 PM |
| I have some space / servers @ www.vdi.net at pretty good costs
Email me my company hasnt launched yet but we will be soon I can still sell servers through email.
lemme know
|
| Posted by Aussie Bob, 03-03-2003, 02:46 PM |
| Might want to read the rules, before you do that again.
|
| Posted by case, 03-03-2003, 03:58 PM |
| im not to fond of nac, i purchased an account from a host that uses nac and was far from impressed. I recommend meridian telesis, they use inap and have good costs. Ive never experienced any downtime or bs excuses .....
|
| Posted by mdrussell, 03-03-2003, 07:28 PM |
| How do you know that it wasn't the host's fault, and not NAC? Overall I still find NAC's premium network impressive.
|
| Posted by Aussie Bob, 03-04-2003, 01:52 AM |
| nods head in agreement*
|
| Posted by H2, 03-04-2003, 02:11 PM |
| Hm. What about bandwidth costs? I thought NAC more expensive that for example, Venturesonline?
What about 95% rule?
p.s. We are going to install one more server in other datacenter.
|
| Posted by ServeForce, 03-04-2003, 05:29 PM |
| There's a really easy way to not worry about 95th percentile.
Rate limit your server.
|
| Posted by h0ster, 02-24-2005, 04:32 PM |
| websytz.com is not a hosting reseller. We have our own facility in Fort Lauderdale, FL. Typically your page loads have nothing to do with ping times.
In a shared environment, your page loads have everything to do with your hosts nameservers, and what other sites are on the server. The problem you run into is the fact that most hosts/ resellers like to promise the world...cheap. When they do that it increases the likelyhood of your site being parked on a server next to a site with naked pictures of Brittney Spears, that the whole world can view for free.
I would go back and re-think your strategy to minimize your hosting purchase to a plan that reflects only what you need for space and bandwidth, as most real hosts set up their automation systems to put particular plans together on a box, to avoid heavy traffic for clients with lighter sites.
I'm not saying we are the choice for you, but I hope this will help you find what you need.
Thanks,
<<< Signatures need to be set up in your profile. >>>
Last edited by SoftWareRevue; 02-25-2005 at 02:05 PM.
|
| Posted by gounder, 02-25-2005, 12:45 AM |
| wow this thread is so old and you respond now.
|
| Posted by h0ster, 02-25-2005, 09:44 AM |
| Just clearing the air. I don't live for responding to these posts. We have our own support forum that keeps me quite busy. We'll probably be here more often now
|
| Posted by gounder, 02-25-2005, 12:08 PM |
| oh ok. welcome back.
|
| Posted by insiderhosting, 02-25-2005, 01:33 PM |
| A 2+ year old thread was awoken. Closing now.
|
Add to Favourites 
Print this Article
Also Read
