# New York - What Interest is there?



## Reece-DM (Jul 27, 2013)

So I know the VPS industry is crammed with Buffalo, NY :blink: --- But its got me thinking, there isn't many that provide VPS on a budget in other New york locations. Is it due to the high bandwidth costs? Being closer to the financial services is a huge plus for some.

What sort of plans we seeing here?  I believe Ninjahawk had NY KVM deal there which wasn't so huge compared to what you'd expect  looking between the "Normal" providers they are charging a premium for NY location.

So to be honest I'm gauging interest to see if people would be interested in a VPS line up here being OVZ based this isn't due to the endless possibilities of overcommitting a servers resources, it serves well as a virtualization and to be quite frank gets the job done superbly if configured and monitored correctly.

However due to other needs of infrastructure there is the possibility I may push either KVM/Vmware shortly after.

Were not planning on going mad, to be honest I feel sick at the mass amount of overselling which has been shown before, were probably looking at a 1:1.5 or 1:2 Ratio per GB RAM.

*Anyways:*

*Few Facts:*

*- *GTT & Zayo Bandwidth

- Just up the road from Wall Street  h34r:

- 2x Intel Xeon  E5-2620 - _24 x 2.00 GHz / Atleast 64GB RAM / 4x 3TB SATA + LSI RAID10 /  1Gbps Network_

- 100% Uptime Each Month

- 10GB FTP Backup free with all VPS'

*Something along the lines of:*

2 Cores / 512MB RAM / 20GB RAID 10 Storage / 500GB BW $3.50 

Please tell me what you think


----------



## notFound (Jul 27, 2013)

NinjaHawk, they already have some great OpenVZ offers. ;-)

More competition isn't bad though, lower prices for me. I'd say go for it, and it'd also be interesting to see if your DDoS protected network can stand up to some decent floods.


----------



## Slownode (Jul 27, 2013)

If you want to host in New York you'll have to stand out with niche services, it's full of generics.

Storage, front-ends, pond-hoppers.


----------



## HalfEatenPie (Jul 27, 2013)

State specifically which datacenter you'll be in (you don't have to specifically state what company your'e with but just show us your peers).  Like the specific address is all I need really.  

Ninjahawk also has servers in New York City and so does VR.org.  Their prices aren't the cheapest but I know it'll continue sustainable growth at those locations.  If you can sustain your growth at New York City at those prices then go for it, but I personally don't see how that's possible.


----------



## D. Strout (Jul 27, 2013)

A couple of things. First, yes, I would like to see more NYC offers - no question about that. _However_: would there be IPv6? What network would this be through? Second, as it stands, no matter how attractive your offer, I wouldn't buy from you for one crucial reason: your website sucks. The design is actually very good, but there are literally only two pages linked that actually work. The rest (about 10 pages by my count) give 404 errors. I do not buy from providers like that under any circumstances. I would rather you didn't have a website at all than have a website like that.


But yes, I would like to see more NYC offers. Oh, and the reason having servers in NYC is expensive is because of simple physical space constraints. There's only so much space in an already crowded city, and servers take up more of it. So you get charged more. It's very expensive to run a DC there.


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 27, 2013)

Problem with New York and east coast in general now is OVH and friends. In the past a lot purchased NY/NJ/etc is European customers. Now they rather get a OVH dedicated server for similar price. I'd downscale and not go towards any east coast operations until we see how the whole fiasco pans out.


----------



## Francisco (Jul 27, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> Problem with New York and east coast in general now is OVH and friends. In the past a lot purchased NY/NJ/etc is European customers. Now they rather get a OVH dedicated server for similar price. I'd downscale and not go towards any east coast operations until we see how the whole fiasco pans out.


It sounds like OVH put the fear of god in you 

Fran


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 27, 2013)

Francisco said:


> It sounds like OVH put the fear of god in you
> 
> Fran


Nah. NY (*cough* Buffalo) has never sold too well for us.


----------



## Steve (Jul 27, 2013)

Definitely interested. There really are next to no budget providers with a proper NYC presence which is disappointing.


----------



## TheLinuxBug (Jul 28, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> Nah. NY (*cough* Buffalo) has never sold too well for us.


And you think that is because of OVH? :blink:   

If I was an international customer the last place I would put my services is in CrapCrossing on their cheap mix.  I think Biloh tried to argue with me one time that they have good (European) latency.... LOL.. they tack on 20ms or more to get to European locations than actual New York city transit.  Buffalo != New York City.

 I guess if your cheap and you want something that has decent peering to Europe/USA OVH isn't the worst option, but if you are serious and have a clue I would hope that would not be your decision.  There are a lot of better providers out there with better European peering and with better support.

In short, I am not sure I agree with your generalization, at all. 

Cheers!


----------



## jarland (Jul 28, 2013)

Problem, in my opinion, would be getting people to read past a title when we're in a situation where you could toss a rock and hit 1500 new startups declaring themselves as NY VPS providers.


A NY offering with a quality blend and not racked with 40,000 other Velocity Servers clients would be a very nice thing to see more of.


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 28, 2013)

TheLinuxBug said:


> And you think that is because of OVH? :blink:
> 
> If I was an international customer the last place I would put my services is in CrapCrossing on their cheap mix.  I think Biloh tried to argue with me one time that they have good (European) latency.... LOL.. they tack on 20ms or more to get to European locations than actual New York city transit.  Buffalo != New York City.
> 
> ...


Most of the world doesn't know of Colocrossing or the things you mention (aka the hate). You'd be surprised. It's only an inner circle of people here. If the hate was that widespread they'd be out of business. ChicagoVPS and friends continue on.

New York location for us has never been that popular (compared to Texas / California) even before OVH.

All I'm saying now though is a lot of NY clients are from EU / UK. A lot of them will pick OVH over it.


----------



## Francisco (Jul 28, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> Most of the world doesn't know of Colocrossing or the things you mention (aka the hate). You'd be surprised. It's only an inner circle of people here. If the hate was that widespread they'd be out of business. ChicagoVPS and friends continue on.
> 
> New York location for us has never been that popular (compared to Texas / California) even before OVH.
> 
> All I'm saying now though is a lot of NY clients are from EU / UK. A lot of them will pick OVH over it.


See that's the thing with you. You keep playing the 'I dont need this market, people should pick me because my network is better and [insert random reasons]'. You then decide to try to compete in the budget storage market (500GB for $7/m?) and seemed to have been scared by OVH.  All the while you've posted on LEB (this isn't me hating on the LE's, it's making a point that LE is a budget community).

You want to offer dedis to compete with QPS i'm assuming but you're having to look at 'budget datacenters' (colocrossing, fiberhub, HE.NET, etc). So do you like these DC's now or is it a "I have no choice"?

Sure, I wish we had level3, GBLX, Telia, etc, etc, in all DC's but I'm not going to double my prices, and completely screw my ability to later grow, just to offer something 99% of our users won't appreciate. 

You need to really decide what market you want to go after and do some real market research. You have offers going in every which direction and unless you have a ton of cash (capital or venture) that you're willing to straight up lose, you better sit down and plan it.

If you need an example of smaller brands that focused on pure quality and not super cheap prices? Check bitcable or cleverkite.

Francisco


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 28, 2013)

Francisco said:


> See that's the thing with you. You keep playing the 'I dont need this market, people should pick me because my network is better and [insert random reasons]'. You then decide to try to compete in the budget storage market (500GB for $7/m?) and seemed to have been scared by OVH.  All the while you've posted on LEB (this isn't me hating on the LE's, it's making a point that LE is a budget community).
> 
> You want to offer dedis to compete with QPS i'm assuming but you're having to look at 'budget datacenters' (colocrossing, fiberhub, HE.NET, etc). So do you like these DC's now or is it a "I have no choice"?
> 
> ...


I'm not sure when I ever said I don't need the LE market. All I said was that I was not into the RAM race. The RAM race has nothing to do with the LE market.

I did say that OVH scared me. It is just best to wait for things to settle down before making a move. That is all. There's no point in rushing things out.

I never said I was not interested in the LE storage market either.

I only said NO to RAM price wars, not storage price wars.

Will be offering dedis from premium data centers. That's already in the works. The budget dedis are a separate range.

Yes, do have the capital over it. Is there a problem with appealing to more than 1 market?

No: I don't want to compete with QPS in that the sense that I won't be buying 4 year old servers and rent them out. It's not like for like.

Does this explain things? I mean to date we've not pushed out a 2gb+ RAM for $7 plan and stuck to that.


----------



## Francisco (Jul 28, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> Yes, do have the capital over it. Is there a problem with appealing to more than 1 market?


Nothing wrong with that but it looks pretty iffy when you're now shuffling back on an entire market because of OVH.

I'll have to dig around forums to find it but I know I've seen you make said comments on other threads.

Francisco


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 28, 2013)

Francisco said:


> Nothing wrong with that but it looks pretty iffy when you're now shuffling back on an entire market because of OVH.
> 
> 
> I'll have to dig around forums to find it but I know I've seen you make said comments on other threads.
> ...


Fran: I've never said I'm pulling out. All I said was I'll delay the launch waiting to see what happens. If there is confusion, then I'm sorry it wasn't clear.

To be precise, we can't launch anything now anyway. I'm still waiting for a few things to ship regardless.

You can poke around. I think all I said was "Is there still any interest in this after the OVH incident?" asking for interest doesn't mean I'll do it or not. Even if a forum has no interest it doesn't mean the product range will be pulled. Also, even if there is a lot of interest we might not do it.


----------



## Francisco (Jul 28, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> Fran: I've never said I'm pulling out. All I said was I'll delay the launch waiting to see what happens. If there is confusion, then I'm sorry it wasn't clear.
> 
> To be precise, we can't launch anything now anyway. I'm still waiting for a few things to ship regardless.
> 
> You can poke around. I think all I said was "Is there still any interest in this after the OVH incident?" asking for interest doesn't mean I'll do it or not. Even if a forum has no interest it doesn't mean the product range will be pulled. Also, even if there is a lot of interest we might not do it.


Nope. You said that the future rests in another companies hands or something to that affect 

Anyways, this is way off course from the OP's.

To answer the OP:

NYC would be cool but best of luck finding filtering in that area. I've yet to find a provider offering any real filtering in that area.

Francisco


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 28, 2013)

Francisco said:


> Nope. You said that the future rests in another companies hands or something to that affect
> 
> 
> Anyways, this is way off course from the OP's.
> ...


That's what Mao said  - maybe I was joining in the fun or poking him/her. Anyway, leave this to a PM if you want to continue. Let's not spam this. It's great that you care though! Thanks for giving me your time.


----------



## TheLinuxBug (Jul 28, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> Most of the world doesn't know of Colocrossing or the things you mention (aka the hate). You'd be surprised.


 

Your right, the smart ones do traceroutes and check peering of the network in the Buffalo location and realize the things I said. Cheap network mix and 20ms+ in additional latency to Europe.  The network can't even start to compare to Choopa.net which if you can't get true New York City hosting is the next best thing latency and network mix wise.  Sadly I wish those people who you say are not aware of these things who are taken in by the cheap cost of services in the location would be made aware of this, then maybe they could make a more informed decision for them selves. Call it hate if you want, but it is also the facts.

@op sorry for derailing your thread.  If you are able to find services in New York City, NY and do it at a reasonable rate, I am sure you will have some customers.  Especially if you can provide native ipv6 (another thing that CrapCrossing in Buffalo has failed at). 

Cheers!


----------



## Francisco (Jul 28, 2013)

I'm guessing you're looking at ubiquity?

From what I can tell they don't provide 'actual' DDoS filtering, it's literally just an autonull:



> This system ensures that your servers are protected against collateral damage that often occurs from hosts nearby your server that are being attacked, keeping you online no matter who else on our network is being attacked. Should your server be attacked and null routed, the attack information will be e-mailed to you and also available in our Motion control panel. This includes sample flows from the attack, the IP addresses that were attacking you, what type of attack it was, and the level of traffic in both Mbps and PPS (Packets per Second).


They have a rented firewall system that can handle up to 450Mbit/sec but i've not seen a flood that small in ages.

Francisco


----------



## Reece-DM (Jul 28, 2013)

HalfEatenPie said:


> State specifically which datacenter you'll be in (you don't have to specifically state what company your'e with but just show us your peers).  Like the specific address is all I need really.
> 
> Ninjahawk also has servers in New York City and so does VR.org.  Their prices aren't the cheapest but I know it'll continue sustainable growth at those locations.  If you can sustain your growth at New York City at those prices then go for it, but I personally don't see how that's possible.


It is at 100 William Street.

Bandwidth is provided via Zayo / GTT .

We were looking at other options in NY,  Enotch had tried to get us in the 111 8th ave location, to bad you can't trust them with a barge pole.



D. Strout said:


> A couple of things. First, yes, I would like to see more NYC offers - no question about that. _However_: would there be IPv6? What network would this be through? Second, as it stands, no matter how attractive your offer, I wouldn't buy from you for one crucial reason: your website sucks. The design is actually very good, but there are literally only two pages linked that actually work. The rest (about 10 pages by my count) give 404 errors. I do not buy from providers like that under any circumstances. I would rather you didn't have a website than have a website like that.
> 
> But yes, I would like to see more NYC offers. Oh, and the reason having servers in NYC is expensive is because of simple physical space constraints. There's only so much space in an already crowded city, and servers take up more of it. So you get charged more. It's very expensive to run a DC there.


Ok, so this thread isn't necessarily me posting my offer I am looking at general interest for this location, as of right now we have 2 servers pending deployment. Whether you guys want good deals on the H/W or not I shall be using them regardless of the market.

Our website isn't launched nor was this thread made to direct people to our domain... Though I should of expected it to be honest.

Once we play with the backend some more and do some final tweaks it will be launched, though due to the nature of some of our clients our website isn't actually to important. But nonetheless! We have some lovely updates to make it complete 



Francisco said:


> Nope. You said that the future rests in another companies hands or something to that affect
> 
> 
> Anyways, this is way off course from the OP's.
> ...


The filtering offered by Ubiquity isn't a "Feature" that we'll be providing  its just overall part of the network and we won't be advertising as " WE CAN STOP DDOS NOW" - On a serious level I'd probably refer people to get a GRE tunnel from yourself,

And yes indeed it is Ubiquity, some hate it some love it. These guys are rocking my socks off right now! Constant support all weekend. 

NY provides full IPV6 Support as well.

In regards to using this market, I'm not putting a ton of 2GB + servers on this server, my pricing for the 512 is an example. but of course if you tier it as a upgrade 1GB = $7 with 40GB Space and that is a reasonable along with being sustainable.


----------



## qps (Jul 28, 2013)

Francisco said:


> See that's the thing with you. You keep playing the 'I dont need this market, people should pick me because my network is better and [insert random reasons]'. You then decide to try to compete in the budget storage market (500GB for $7/m?) and seemed to have been scared by OVH.  All the while you've posted on LEB (this isn't me hating on the LE's, it's making a point that LE is a budget community).
> 
> You want to offer dedis to compete with QPS i'm assuming but you're having to look at 'budget datacenters' (colocrossing, fiberhub, HE.NET, etc). So do you like these DC's now or is it a "I have no choice"?
> 
> ...


I noticed that I was mentioned here.  Is there a problem with what QuickPacket does?


----------



## Reece-DM (Jul 28, 2013)

qps said:


> I noticed that I was mentioned here.  Is there a problem with what QuickPacket does?


No I don't believe so @QPS -- Fran is pointing out many attempts to be in the low end market, not you personally.


----------



## SeriesN (Jul 28, 2013)

qps said:


> I noticed that I was mentioned here.  Is there a problem with what QuickPacket does?


Yes, why do you offer good service for cheap price?


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 28, 2013)

qps said:


> I noticed that I was mentioned here.  Is there a problem with what QuickPacket does?


I don't know why you were mentioned. Have nothing against QPS or trying to compete. All I talked about was i3 / i5 servers. Surely desktop servers are in a different market altogether. Sorry for having to get you into this.


----------



## qps (Jul 28, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> I don't know why you were mentioned. Have nothing against QPS or trying to compete. All I talked about was i3 / i5 servers. Surely desktop servers are in a different market altogether. Sorry for having to get you into this.


We do some desktop hardware-based servers too.  Lately, with as cheap as the off-lease servers have been going for, it's been cheaper to go with the off-lease servers instead of the desktop hardware.  The off-lease servers often provide better bang-for-your-buck in terms of performance too.


----------



## imperio (Jul 28, 2013)

Francisco said:


> You want to offer dedis to compete with QPS i'm assuming but you're having to look at 'budget datacenters' (colocrossing, fiberhub, HE.NET, etc). So do you like these DC's now or is it a "I have no choice"?
> 
> Sure, I wish we had level3, GBLX, Telia, etc, etc, in all DC's but I'm not going to double my prices, and completely screw my ability to later grow, just to offer something 99% of our users won't appreciate.


Fran, there are LEB providers located on fiberhub dc which have nlayer,pccw and tinet in their upstream mix.Do you really have to stick with he + cogent mix on fiberhub without doubling your pricing ?


----------



## Francisco (Jul 28, 2013)

imperio said:


> Fran, there are LEB providers located on fiberhub dc which have nlayer,pccw and tinet in their upstream mix.Do you really have to stick with he + cogent mix on fiberhub without doubling your pricing ?


 None of those are in FH, you can check their sales post. TINET isn't available anymore and nlayer/pccw were never in FH. I'd have to pay backhaul prices from LA for anything.



qps said:


> I noticed that I was mentioned here.  Is there a problem with what QuickPacket does?





imperio said:


> Fran, there are LEB providers located on fiberhub dc which have nlayer,pccw and tinet in their upstream mix.Do you really have to stick with he + cogent mix on fiberhub without doubling your pricing ?


 


qps said:


> I noticed that I was mentioned here.  Is there a problem with what QuickPacket does?


You're one of the few in the LEB price bracket (<$50/m) that actually advertise on here/LE. Neither of you are going to be competing with datashack/WSI since they're in the 1000's of physical servers, if not coming up into the 10's of thousands.



Reece said:


> The filtering offered by Ubiquity isn't a "Feature" that we'll be providing  its just overall part of the network and we won't be advertising as " WE CAN STOP DDOS NOW" - On a serious level I'd probably refer people to get a GRE tunnel from yourself,
> 
> And yes indeed it is Ubiquity, some hate it some love it. These guys are rocking my socks off right now! Constant support all weekend.


You listed ddos protected is all  It's only recently that they fixed their description to mention that it isn't actual filtering, just an autonull. Nothing wrong with using an autonull, there should be more of them 

Francisco


----------



## qps (Jul 28, 2013)

Francisco said:


> You're one of the few in the LEB price bracket (<$50/m) that actually advertise on here/LE. Neither of you are going to be competing with datashack/WSI since they're in the 1000's of physical servers, if not coming up into the 10's of thousands.


This is like saying BuyVM isn't going to be competing with Linode, Amazon, or <insert provider here> because they have more servers than BuyVM does.


----------



## Francisco (Jul 28, 2013)

qps said:


> This is like saying BuyVM isn't going to be competing with Linode, Amazon, or <insert provider here> because they have more servers than BuyVM does.
> 
> Bigger doesn't always mean better... unless you're talking about epeen, in which case, you obviously must have the biggest one?


Nope, we don't compete with either of those  We'll never be as big as even linode, nevermind amazon, unless we get some huge influx of cash.

You have a few racks, datashack/WSI have a few datacenters. DS/WSI target providers a lot since they offer more IP's than you so it's a different market.

I think you're taking this as a swing for some reason. I've not slagged your product and know at least 2 people personally that have boxes with you. In fact I directed at least 1 of them your way for their TF2 servers and have made mention of you at least a few times on WHT when someone is looking for a cheap deal. You don't see datashack/WSI posting on LE's front page, though, because that isn't a target market for them. You/Versaweb do so you'll get grouped as 'LEB dedicated hosts'.

Francisco


----------



## dmmcintyre3 (Jul 28, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> Problem with New York and east coast in general now is OVH and friends. In the past a lot purchased NY/NJ/etc is European customers. Now they rather get a OVH dedicated server for similar price. I'd downscale and not go towards any east coast operations until we see how the whole fiasco pans out.


Same applies to US residents on the east coast. For me it's a toss up between EU and western US as far as network speeds and latency goes.


----------



## imperio (Jul 28, 2013)

Francisco said:


> None of those are in FH, you can check their sales post. TINET isn't available anymore and nlayer/pccw were never in FH. I'd have to pay backhaul prices from LA for anything.
> 
> 
> Francisco


I am seeing fiberhub with tinet,nlayer and pccw upstreams via blacklotus for IP address: 199.19.78.1 .


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 28, 2013)

imperio said:


> I am seeing fiberhub with tinet,nlayer and pccw upstreams via blacklotus for IP address: 199.19.78.1 .


That's Black Lotus. Not Firehub. Only the DDoS protected part.




dmmcintyre3 said:


> Same applies to US residents on the east coast. For me it's a toss up between EU and western US as far as network speeds and latency goes.



Good to know someone agrees


----------



## Francisco (Jul 28, 2013)

dmmcintyre3 said:


> Same applies to US residents on the east coast. For me it's a toss up between EU and western US as far as network speeds and latency goes.


Are the east coast DC's routing that poorly? Or is it that up to 100ms isn't a big enough deal?

Francisco


----------



## dmmcintyre3 (Jul 28, 2013)

Francisco said:


> Are the east coast DC's routing that poorly? Or is it that up to 100ms isn't a big enough deal?
> 
> Francisco


I was comparing west coast DCs and EU DCs.


----------



## imperio (Jul 28, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> That's Black Lotus. Not Firehub. Only the DDoS protected part.


Not fiberhub ? Fiberhub peers with blacklotus which means you can use blacklotus's upstreams as well.



> *Q: Who are your upstream bandwidth providers?*A: Our route-optimized network is a BGP4 multi-homed blend of Black Lotus, Cogent, HE.net, TWTC, as well as multiple direct peering arrangements.
> 
> *Q: Do you have any other network providers available?*
> 
> ...


----------



## Francisco (Jul 28, 2013)

imperio said:


> Not fiberhub ? Fiberhub peers with blacklotus which means you can use blacklotus's upstreams as well.


Nope.

Their BL routes are inbound only and only on the subnets announced to BL. Outbound routes will take FH's inhouse blend.

They used to have TINET but picked up abovenet to replace it. They didn't expect zayo to delay things for so long though so there wasn't a smooth swap over like they expected.

Francisco


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 28, 2013)

Yeah Fran explained nicely. The "peering" is just ddos protected transit. Not normal transit.


----------



## imperio (Jul 28, 2013)

Thank you for clarification.


----------



## peterw (Jul 29, 2013)

My problem with Buffalo is that the CC routing is going via Chicago and then is arriving in London.

So Chicago or Detroit is a better option (ping wise).

Even the Atlanta routing via Washington which then is arriving in Paris is better.


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 29, 2013)

peterw said:


> My problem with Buffalo is that the CC routing is going via Chicago and then is arriving in London.
> 
> So Chicago or Detroit is a better option (ping wise).
> 
> Even the Atlanta routing via Washington which then is arriving in Paris is better.


That's a Cogent issue. Let's not blame CC on everything . You can say CC shouldn't just use Cogent though. What ping are you getting? (out of interest)?


----------



## Francisco (Jul 29, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> That's a Cogent issue. Let's not blame CC on everything . You can say CC shouldn't just use Cogent though. What ping are you getting? (out of interest)?


I saw the same thing with L3 as well. I don't think there is very much bandwidth that runs from NYC to Buffalo. The only time I saw a trace go direct when it was from a university in NYC to Buffalo.

Other than that I've always seen it going through Chicago :S

I would have figured Telia would be the favored transit to get to Europe. It should give fairly nice latency. Then again, if it's having to backhaul that sucks 

Francisco


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 29, 2013)

Francisco said:


> I saw the same thing with L3 as well. I don't think there is very much bandwidth that runs from NYC to Buffalo. The only time I saw a trace go direct when it was from a university in NYC to Buffalo.
> 
> Other than that I've always seen it going through Chicago :S
> 
> ...


Then maybe it is a CC problem. It depends on where they backhaul transit from. I would have thought they organized a real POP in Buffalo. Hm.

I haven't seen that great results from Telia actually. At least not worth the pricing it asks for.


----------



## peterw (Jul 29, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> That's a Cogent issue.


Look to their network map



I don't know why they are routing through Chicago.


----------



## peterw (Jul 29, 2013)

concerto49 said:


> I would have thought they organized a real POP in Buffalo.


No. They don't even have a looking glass http://www.cogentco.com/en/network/looking-glass


----------



## Reece-DM (Aug 1, 2013)

Just a update, we're going to go ahead with 100 William Street. We will be posting further information in a couple of days.



> 2x Intel Xeon Sandy Bridge E5-2620 - 2.00 GHz (20 Cores!)
> 64GB RAM
> 
> 4x 3TB SATA
> ...


We;re waiting on a few things being setup, so far so good though


----------



## Reece-DM (Aug 12, 2013)

Ok just a quick update:

We have got all of our H/W installed and running flawlessly!

Anybody want a 7 day trial? We would like to hear your thoughts on it -- Just shoot a PM


----------



## peterw (Aug 19, 2013)

Anybody tested this location yet?


----------



## drmike (Aug 19, 2013)

I missed the end of this thread 

Routing out of Buffalo is often wrong directed from CC's network.  The Chicago preference, yes, exists.

Frankly, I don't believe the upstream providers are the reason for the routing issues. 

I tested two NYC based sites (government and school district) and found the routing of one prior via Chicago. The other was fine.  Today, they are both fine and Telia or XO handles  most of the route with little handoff.

Prior, I was seeing lots of Telia to XO to someone else.  It was common to see Telia to XO to Cogent and then back again to Telia.

Hard to say what has changed in past month, but from my simple tests, much better.


----------



## drmike (Aug 19, 2013)

Of course, one more test and this funny route from Buffalo:

7: te0-2-0-0.mpd22.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com 10.520ms asymm 9
8: vlan52.ebr2.Chicago2.Level3.net 44.577ms asymm 11
9: level3.jfk05.atlas.cogentco.com 10.478ms asymm 8
10: ae-3-3.ebr2.Atlanta2.Level3.net 47.307ms asymm 11
11: ae-71-71.ebr1.NewYork1.Level3.net 41.281ms
12: ae-2-52.edge1.Miami2.Level3.net 43.352ms asymm 10
13: ae-1-100.ebr1.Washington12.Level3.net 41.129ms asymm 11
14: ae-6-6.ebr1.Atlanta2.Level3.net 41.208ms asymm 11
15: ae-1-100.ebr2.Atlanta2.Level3.net 41.510ms asymm 11
16: ae-2-2.ebr2.Miami1.Level3.net 40.986ms asymm 10
17: ae-2-52.edge1.Miami2.Level3.net 40.942ms asymm 10

Buffalo ---> NYC ---> Chicago ---> NYC ---> Atlanta ---> NYC --> Miami -->  DC --> Atlanta --> Miami

Doh!


----------



## wlanboy (Aug 20, 2013)

Have a nice Buffalo -> Chicago routing too: BUF -> NY ->CHI


3 . (172.245.12.225) 0.799 ms host.colocrossing.com (192.3.9.141) 0.905 ms 0.832 ms
4 te7-4.ccr01.buf02.atlas.cogentco.com (38.122.36.45) 10.280 ms 207.86.157.13 (207.86.157.13) 0.393 ms te7-4.ccr01.buf02.atlas.cogentco.com (38.122.36.45) 10.252 ms
5 nyk-bb1-link.telia.net (80.91.246.37) 9.655 ms 9.620 ms 9.663 ms
6 nyk-b3-link.telia.net (80.91.248.174) 9.899 ms te9-7.ccr01.jfk01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.43.6) 10.347 ms te4-4.ccr01.jfk01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.142) 10.254 ms
7 te0-6-0-6.ccr22.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.24.150) 10.453 ms tmobile-ic-302276-war-b1.c.telia.net (213.248.83.118) 24.822 ms 24.653 ms
8 eth4-3.r1.nyc1.us.atrato.net (78.152.44.201) 24.605 ms 24.584 ms 24.508 ms
9 eth1-3.r1.chi1.us.atrato.net (78.152.35.240) 13.172 ms 24.060 ms eth2-4.r1.chi1.us.atrato.net (78.152.34.150) 24.130 ms

Routing to Florida is nice too: BUF -> NY -> Washington -> Miami -> NY -> Tampa


```
3  . (172.245.12.225)  2.571 ms host.colocrossing.com (192.3.9.141)  0.961 ms  0.949 ms
 4  207.86.157.13 (207.86.157.13)  0.403 ms te7-4.ccr01.buf02.atlas.cogentco.com (38.122.36.45)  10.280 ms  10.418 ms
 5  nyk-bb1-link.telia.net (80.91.246.37)  9.778 ms  9.634 ms  9.645 ms
 6  te9-7.ccr01.jfk01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.43.6)  10.310 ms 216.156.0.249.ptr.us.xo.net (216.156.0.249)  57.282 ms  69.087 ms
 7  te-3-0-0.rar3.washington-dc.us.xo.net (207.88.12.74)  64.221 ms xo-ic-138322-nyk-b6.c.telia.net (213.248.67.62)  15.485 ms te0-2-0-0.mpd22.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.30)  10.429 ms
 8  be2060.ccr21.jfk05.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.10)  10.780 ms te-3-0-0.rar3.atlanta-ga.us.xo.net (207.88.12.9)  63.342 ms  63.361 ms
 9  level3.jfk05.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.11.218)  10.283 ms level3.jfk05.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.12.250)  10.167 ms te-4-0-0.rar3.miami-fl.us.xo.net (207.88.12.6)  60.839 ms
10  te-4-0-0.rar3.miami-fl.us.xo.net (207.88.12.6)  54.124 ms vlan70.csw2.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.69.155.126)  46.051 ms te-4-0-0.rar3.miami-fl.us.xo.net (207.88.12.6)  53.900 ms
11  64.220.113.122.ptr.us.xo.net (64.220.113.122)  57.560 ms ae0d0.mcr1.tampa-fl.us.xo.net (216.156.0.218)  51.488 ms  51.232 ms
12  4.69.201.70 (4.69.201.70)  46.250 ms 4.69.201.66 (4.69.201.66)  47.279 ms 64.220.113.122.ptr.us.xo.net (64.220.113.122)  51.712 ms
13  ae-1-100.ebr1.Washington12.Level3.net (4.69.143.213)  56.858 ms v996.core1.esnet.com (216.139.207.17)  52.184 ms  51.984 ms
```


----------



## Reece-DM (Aug 20, 2013)

Test IP for anyone: 23.81.66.251

I'll be adding a looking glass later, please note I am waiting on final IP allocations from DC then things will be live and ready for everyone.

[SIZE=12.727272033691406px]Also final note: We will be getting our own allocation from ARIN soon enough which will be in effect within the next month or so [/SIZE]


----------



## drmike (Aug 20, 2013)

Thanks @wlanboy.   Textbook examples wrong routing.

I don't muck at the network routing level, but seems be something afoul in Buffalo.   These routes weren't busted like this until Cogent and XO got thrown in the mix and Level 3 was basically removed.

Sad, because Buffalo is actually pretty speedy from my location and upstream.   That's even with my upstream routing everything through Chicago.  So latency = 35-40ms whereas if routed right would be < 20ms.  My upstreams stupidity on that, not Colocrossing's.


----------



## wlanboy (Aug 21, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> I don't muck at the network routing level, but seems be something afoul in Buffalo.   These routes weren't busted like this until Cogent and XO got thrown in the mix and Level 3 was basically removed.
> 
> Sad, because Buffalo is actually pretty speedy from my location and upstream.


Yup. I can confirm that the routing was way better at the beginning of 2012. I even moved my vps from Chicago to Buffalo these days.

Main reason why I had 4 vps in Buffalo (now 2).


----------



## wlanboy (Aug 21, 2013)

Reece said:


> Test IP for anyone: 23.81.66.251


Thank you for sharing.

From UK:


4 ldn-b3-link.telia.net (80.239.195.133) 1.206 ms 1.201 ms 1.188 ms
5 ldn-bb1-link.telia.net (213.155.133.2) 1.234 ms ldn-bb1-link.telia.net (80.91.245.26) 1.265 ms ldn-bb1-link.telia.net (80.91.251.166) 1.203 ms
6 ldn-b5-link.telia.net (80.91.246.147) 1.120 ms 1.336 ms ldn-b5-link.telia.net (213.155.132.195) 1.220 ms
7 abovenet-ic-151536-ldn-b5.c.telia.net (213.248.76.86) 1.229 ms 4.181 ms 4.111 ms
8 xe-0-0-1.mpr2.lhr2.uk.above.net (64.125.21.29) 1.453 ms 1.445 ms 1.441 ms
9 ge-3-3-0.mpr1.la5.us.above.net (64.125.26.37) 89.356 ms 89.336 ms 89.312 ms
10 xe-0-0-0.cr2.lga5.us.above.net (64.125.29.42) 69.939 ms 69.921 ms 69.898 ms
11 xe-0-1-0.mpr2.lga7.us.above.net (64.125.27.117) 69.803 ms 69.791 ms 69.890 ms
12 208.184.35.178.IPYX-067818-004-ZYO.above.net (208.184.35.178) 70.703 ms 70.564 ms 73.487 ms

From NL:


 3  jointtransit.telecity2.openpeering.nl (82.150.153.93)  1.628 ms  1.706 ms  1.723 ms
 4  er1.ams1.nl.above.net (195.69.144.122)  5.584 ms  5.555 ms  5.545 ms
 5  ge-3-3-0.mpr1.ams1.nl.above.net (64.125.25.13)  2.232 ms  2.215 ms  2.229 ms
 6  xe-5-3-0.cr2.lga5.us.above.net (64.125.25.57)  107.715 ms  101.043 ms  101.026 ms
 7  xe-0-1-0.mpr2.lga7.us.above.net (64.125.27.117)  77.135 ms  77.172 ms  77.161 ms
 8  208.184.35.178.IPYX-067818-004-ZYO.above.net (208.184.35.178)  77.342 ms  77.342 ms  77.464 ms

From Tallin:


3 r9-ae3-0-Tln-Linx-EE.linxtelecom.net (195.222.7.169) 0.354 ms 0.345 ms 0.326 ms
4 r9-ae2-0-Sln-Song-SE.linxtelecom.net (212.47.201.190) 28.000 ms 5.864 ms 27.960 ms
5 xe-10-3-1-651.bar1.Stockholm1.Level3.net (213.242.110.77) 5.712 ms 5.716 ms 5.709 ms
6 ae-113-3503.bar1.Stockholm1.Level3.net (4.69.158.250) 35.470 ms ae-111-3501.bar1.Stockholm1.Level3.net (4.69.158.242) 35.938 ms ae-114-3504.bar1.Stockholm1.Level3.net (4.69.158.254) 35.762 ms
7 ae-45-45.ebr3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.143.166) 34.911 ms 34.920 ms ae-48-48.ebr3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.143.178) 35.688 ms
8 ae-83-83.csw3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.163.10) 35.618 ms ae-93-93.csw4.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.163.14) 35.610 ms ae-83-83.csw3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.163.10) 35.554 ms
9 ae-4-90.edge5.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.154.201) 46.021 ms 43.711 ms ae-3-80.edge5.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.154.137) 35.645 ms
10 xe-0-2-0.mpr1.fra4.de.above.net (64.125.14.5) 35.750 ms 35.734 ms 35.846 ms
11 xe-3-1-0.mpr2.ams5.nl.above.net (64.125.24.102) 36.714 ms 36.777 ms 37.231 ms
12 xe-0-2-0.cr2.lga5.us.above.net (64.125.27.185) 121.623 ms 121.653 ms 121.647 ms
13 xe-0-1-0.mpr2.lga7.us.above.net (64.125.27.117) 121.905 ms 121.889 ms 121.870 ms
14 208.184.35.178.IPYX-067818-004-ZYO.above.net (208.184.35.178) 128.312 ms 128.292 ms 128.358 ms

Nice!


----------



## Reece-DM (Aug 21, 2013)

wlanboy said:


> Thank you for sharing.
> 
> From UK:
> 
> ...


Thank you 

http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2013/08/21/PumZZFzf3Xp4yK7Z


Thats a benchmark from one of the 100Mbps OVZ nodes. However we will be rolling out 1Gbps shortly


----------



## wlanboy (Aug 21, 2013)

Reece said:


> http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2013/08/21/PumZZFzf3Xp4yK7Z
> 
> 
> Thats a benchmark from one of the 100Mbps OVZ nodes. However we will be rolling out 1Gbps shortly


I would like to see smaller packages too.

1024 / 512 MB of RAM is just a waste of resources for my small Ruby web services.


----------



## Reece-DM (Aug 21, 2013)

Hi,

Sorry seems as if VPSb glitched and didn't post my reply.

Anyways; We won't be sticking with 512MB+ Plans, more on the lines of going up in intervals of 128MB > 256MB >  384MB then to 512MB > 1GB ect. Some of the smaller ones will be offered on a 6/Mo or 12/Mo basis.

I forgot about custom VPS  as well.. 

Reece



wlanboy said:


> I would like to see smaller packages too.
> 
> 1024 / 512 MB of RAM is just a waste of resources for my small Ruby web services.


----------



## drmike (Aug 21, 2013)

+1 for small packages and annuals.


----------



## Steven F (Aug 22, 2013)

According to Jon Biloh, they will be dropping Cogent on September 10th and adding in a lot of Level 3. Hopefully this will resolve all of the routing issues and Buffalo will become a viable location (again). It's still three weeks away, but that's not too much longer.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Aug 22, 2013)

Haven't they been saying the same about IPv6 for years now?  Doesn't exactly inspire confidence in promises of 'improvements to come'.


----------



## drmike (Aug 22, 2013)

Cogent was some trial period / promo.  Probably was just time to start paying the full rate and now shown the door.

I am not sure if Cogent was causing many issues when I use/test there.   Not seeing much of it myself.

Cogent leaving is mainly pegged on congestion to Comcast.  Oddly, that congestion remains in Chicago and unsure why they'd  route from BUF to CHI knowing that.  Bound to be peering ability to steer clear of the REAL documented saturation points n CHI.

Now if they'd work XO out of there too, they might have something to talk about.


----------



## wlanboy (Aug 23, 2013)

Aldryic C said:


> Haven't they been saying the same about IPv6 for years now?  Doesn't exactly inspire confidence in promises of 'improvements to come'.


Second that.

For at least one year they tell everyone that IPv6 will come "within the next 2 weeks".


----------



## drmike (Aug 23, 2013)

GTFO!

I am not a router and infrastructure engineer.  Has to be some reason they are refusing to roll IPV6 out.

A year   Oh I think they've been on the IPV6 coming soon for at least two years. 

Who remembers when they first heard CC or CVPS promise IPV6?


----------



## Reece-DM (Aug 23, 2013)

buffalooed said:


> GTFO!
> 
> I am not a router and infrastructure engineer.  Has to be some reason they are refusing to roll IPV6 out.
> 
> ...


Probably them ripping ARIN For as many IPv4 as they can get before doing a "Switch over" to V6


----------

