SecureDragon Changes Up Their Bandwidth Pricing
- Thread starter raindog308
- Start date
Yep...that's why I like SD. Class act.
I've heard enough horror stories from their staff, current and past clients, and other data center's who used to host in the same building as them before they got kicked out.
Last edited by a moderator:
We will be renegotiating our contract in a few months when our current contract is up. In the mean time I've been crunching numbers on new plans and pricing (I've already made some changes to our KVM and DDOS Protected plans).
Last edited by a moderator:
I posted a quick update in the other thread but we have decided to change up our plans as a result of much review of our current and future resources.
We've removed the 32MB and 96MB plans and we've increased the bandwidth for all plans with less than 250GB to the new bandwidth allocation of 250GB.
We've removed the 32MB and 96MB plans and we've increased the bandwidth for all plans with less than 250GB to the new bandwidth allocation of 250GB.
Originally the 32MB and 64MB were novelty plans that we offered on a limited basis because of some requests here and there. Eventually they became our best selling plans. I've always wanted to reduce the number of plans we offered because with our old pricing our it was only $2 more a month from our 32MB to our 64MB plan and for our 96MB plan it was only $1 more for our 128MB plan. I'm very happy we've reduced our number of plans offered while increasing the value for our clients.
I plan on setting something up in the future since I specifically coded our new control panel to give each client a /64 of IPv6 and clients can add their own IP addresses in the panel. We've given each of our data centers a /48 but we have plenty more from ARIN.
Well the LES idea is they sell very low cost vps's by not including a dedicated ipv4 address. Just ipv6 plus they NAT a handful of high-numbered ports from the host node's main ipv4 address to each vps. That means there are a few services like SMTP and DNS that you can't run on ipv4 because they need specific port numbers, but you can run most everything else. (They handle port 80 with haproxy on the host node splitting stuff out by host header). It actually works remarkably well. I can't think of anything that I've ever actually run on a vps, that would have been more than slightly inconvenienced under the LES scheme. Example of slight inconvenience: I have to say "ssh -p 12345 myhost" if I want to ssh to my host on ipv4, since port 22 isn't available to the vps. No big deal. Sooner or later my home isp will support ipv6 and this stuff will work transparently.
I've been switching all of my personal servers over to IPv6 since I have Comcast and they gave me a /64 of IPv6 to my home router. I would love to embrace IPv6 by going the LES route but I think it would be hard to mix IPv6-only VPSs on the same node with dedicated IPv4.
As for the cost, IPv4 is such a small cost compared to the rest of our infrastructure that I don't think it would make that big of an impact if we used NAT instead. I'll continue to look into it though.
As for the cost, IPv4 is such a small cost compared to the rest of our infrastructure that I don't think it would make that big of an impact if we used NAT instead. I'll continue to look into it though.
For very small plans like your 64MB, I would have thought the dedicated ipv4 address was a significant part of the cost, or at least will become that way once the endgame arrives for the different hoarding schemes that various data centers are up to. But you're more in contact with the economics of this stuff than I am, so I defer to you about it.
We get our IPs directly from ARIN so there is no monthly cost associated with our IPs luckily. As nice as it would be to hoard up IPv4, I see them as a temporary commodity. Once the IPv4 addresses dry up, then big players will make the move to IPv6, then X years down the road IPv4 will be legacy and get phased out since it will be unnecessary since any ISP worth anything will be running an IPv6 infrastructure.
Maybe not for internal networks but I don't see IPv4 being a major selling feature in the hosting industry in 10 years.
Many residentlial ISPs would rather do carrier grade NAT than implement ipv6 in the near time.