arpnetworks guy in? maybe something we can help with? i was trying to remember the 2 providers i was considering a couple of months ago, as i'm finally ready to get a vps just wanted to make sure i went with the right one one of them is a company, the other is a 1 man sho show this is a company. I've been happy with them which one does garry run? You mean Garry Dolley? not sure what the person's last name is but it's based in so cal iirc there's a Garry here. Might be your guy. does he run arpnetworks? yes ok then yea that's the one. i'm gonna support him as far as i can tell I have had 5 VPS here for over 16 monhts very happy nice! what do you think of that summer special? 768 MB 20 GB 400 GB $25 $20 i only need the 10$/mo account but this gives me almost 4x more of everything for twice as much coin I have one of those as one of my five the rest are all bigger. nice spending about $250/month of my money and my client's money here. now i've already decided to sign up with arp, so really just a curiosity, but can you think of any negative points of arp from your expeirence? nice the most negative thing is that you'll be spoiled. you'll expect this kind of price/performance when you go somewhere else. :) and nothing else is like that that's seriously the only bad thing you can think of? :P also keep in mind that "official" support is available, but minimal. you should be someone who can manage your boxes entirely on your own or by asking here in channel for our help Garry only gets involved when someone has to actually punch your box differently that's why you get a VNC console and a mounted boot DVD. yea sure, i and my admin know fbsd since 2.2.7 myself all 5 of my boxes are ZFS for / with snapshots throughout the day. and for some of them, we're shipping using zfs send/recv to a remote site for catastrophe backup nice set up btw i see fbsd 8.2 isn't offered it is... I have it mounted already garry just needs to update the website oh nice how's your experience been with 8.2? non-eventful. it Just Works. putting ZFS for root is easier on 8.2 than on 8.1 nice no need to copy extra bootloaders. :) are those 5 ips all usable? or are some gateway etc in the powerup you get 1 external IP in the base price you can pay more to get more a /30 = 1 address a /29 = 5 addresses a /28 = 13 addresses if you go above /28, you need a big pile of paperwork yea, that must be usable another 3 burned for the overhead cause /29 is actually 8 iirc sure. 5 + network + broadcast + router yep ill definitely want the /29 1 dedicated to server admin/ssh with everything else shut down, 4 others for web you need 4 ssl? because otherwise, most people just use name-based domains now yea i know, but i have a few totally separate projects that i want to keep that way single IP, distinguished by the "host:" header, which everyone sends these days not good to mix midget porn and monster truck ralleys yanno yea, http 1.1 thx I bought a /28 just to have a few for spare experiments in case it gets a lot harder later. :) nice RandalSchwartz, what kind of management features does arp give? is there a customer extranet where you can view real time bandwidth flows, etc? RandalSchwartz: an IPv4 address is 32 bits long Olipro - Yes, I know. Why would you think I don't know that? :) RandalSchwartz got a /28 back when I offered /28's to everyone; now I am more restrictive as IP resources become more scarce tigerpaw - you can request some sort of cacti datagrams ;) ahh - we have woken the man himself RandalSchwartz: so a /30 gives you 4 addresses (assuming it's not on a boundary where one of the possible addresses is 0 or 255) cisco has a command, 'ip subnet-zero' or something like that, that let's you use the '0' one :) Olipro - no it doesn't the all 0's and all 1's are (almost) always reserved no matter what the network mask is so looking at the bottom two bits of a /30: if you give someone 10.0.0.48/30 then that person has 10.0.0.48 through to 10.0.0.51 available to them 00 - network number 01 - router 10 - machine 11 - broadcast so you get *one* usable address Olipro - I'm going to stop arguing with you now, since you aren't listening. if you give someone 10.0.0.48/30, then 10.0.0.48 is the network number, 10.0.0.49 is the router, 10.0.0.50 is the machine (one useful address), and 10.0.0.51 is the broadcast addr and *now* I will stop RandalSchwartz: ah ok, a routed subnet gotcha what did you THINK we were talking about? a single host in a larger subnet RandalSchwartz: if the /30 was routed over another point-to-point address, instead of assigned to a VLAN, it *is* then possible to use more IPs. The gateway would be free'd and the network number technically _could_ be used if the TCP/IP stack supports it. i think only the broadcast has to stay reserved. correct. but not a traditional /30. :) can you route v4 like we're doing with v6? no - wait, v4 doesn't have link-local addrs although you could burn a couple rfc-1918 for that, probably If all the devices on the subnet agree about how the addresses are to be used, there's no reason to reserve the network and broadcast addresses. Using a /31 on an ethernet segment to join two machines together is fine if they both understand it. RandalSchwartz: you can route v4 like v6 but typically v4 routes over some public /30. so point-to-point links burn a /30. v6 does away with this by using link-local plett: would you need static arp entries in that case? up_the_irons: You shouldn't need them. ARP sits on top of ethernet and doesn't know about the size of the subnet you're using plett: where would IP broadcasts go then (not ARP broadcasts) ? Are they simply not used? Yes, they just don't exist. That's one of the things that the machines on the subnet would all have to agree about. ah ok I've only seen it used "in the wild" with /31s for point-to-point links over ethernet, but there's no real reason why it couldn't work on larger subnets too up_the_irons: On Linux, ifconfig takes a "-broadcast" flag which disables the use of the broadcast address on that interface (and therefore disables IP broadcasts completely). I think the network address is already safe for use as a regular address without any changes. plett - no such flag on freebsd there's a broadcast arg, to specify the broadcast so that's definitely a non-standard interpretation of the RFCs Oh yes, it's definitely non-standard. But lots of equipment does support it. I've used it between a Cisco router and a Linux box in the past But now we have IPv6, and subnets are big enough that nobody will notice the fact that two addresses on each subnet aren't available for use FreeBSD TCP/IP stack is a lot more standard than Linux. I've seen some very peculiar's quirks on Linux that I haven't seen on FreeBSD. plett: v6 doesn't use broadcast addresses :) given that BSD's stack derives from *the* standard stack, it's not surprising. it's all NDP up_the_irons: Okay, I rephrase that - nobody (by which I mean me!) will notice that broadcast addresses don't even exist any more :) :) wow. just ssh'd into a .edu fw w/an account i haven't used in ~5 years. scary (i setup the fw fwiw) security++ How long does it take to get a second vps after the first? Same time?