starting business

[thomas harding]

i need to lnow what is the best online website software is and i need to know if i should put us on s server

[kichilron]

Software for what? What are you trying to do? What kind of business are you building and why do you need a server for that?

 

If it's down to just any software for a webserver, NGINX.

[joshmcd]

If your starting a buisness I recommend hiring someone to do it for you. I can make portfolio style websites for little or nothing it depends on what time i have. I recommend just renting a webserver from www.godaddy.com .

[Lumi]

If your starting a buisness I recommend hiring someone to do it for you. I can make portfolio style websites for little or nothing it depends on what time i have. I recommend just renting a webserver from www.godaddy.com .

If you're going to recommend someone rent a server from godaddy you don't deserve to be listened to.

[YellowDragon]

If you're going to recommend someone rent a server from godaddy you don't deserve to be listened to.

I typically go with Hostgator, great support and they let you do pretty much anything you want with it.

[Lumi]

I typically go with Hostgator, great support and they let you do pretty much anything you want with it.

Just as bad of a suggestion. You could get better performance out of a 5$ a month VPS from digital ocean running a LEMP stack.

[joshmcd]

If you're going to recommend someone rent a server from godaddy you don't deserve to be listened to.

Thats what I use. Its the cheapest for what I want and for where I am. There are obviously many more webserver hosters out there.

[YellowDragon]

Just as bad of a suggestion. You could get better performance out of a 5$ a month VPS from digital ocean running a LEMP stack.

How about we go the longest yard and say that every service is bad unless im hosting it myself off  my own server.

[Lumi]

How about we go the longest yard and say that every service is bad unless im hosting it myself off  my own server.

Because that's not true lol.

[Lumi]

Thats what I use. Its the cheapest for what I want and for where I am. There are obviously many more webserver hosters out there.

You can get shitty economy hosting for 4.99 a month with the ability to add a wopping 1 website!

Or you can get a 512MB digital ocean vps (or similar company) for 5$ a month and host like 10 small websites just fine.

[YellowDragon]

Because that's not true lol.

I think you missed the point.......who cares it works, you make choices for what you think is best. I use mine for convenience and hosting my own site nothing more, but  to each his own.

[Lumi]

I think you missed the point.......who cares it works, you make choices for what you think is best. I use mine for convenience and hosting my own site nothing more, but  to each his own.

Yes, it does work. No, it's not as good of a deal as you might assume.

[joshmcd]

You can get shitty economy hosting for 4.99 a month with the ability to add a wopping 1 website!

Or you can get a 512MB digital ocean vps (or similar company) for 5$ a month and host like 10 small websites just fine.

I got it for 80 cent a month (I'm from Ireland)

[Lumi]

I got it for 80 cent a month (I'm from Ireland)

It's still pretty bad because they put hundreds of sites on each node and if one gets hit the entire node dies for a short period of time.

[Neil]

It's still pretty bad because they put hundreds of sites on each node and if one gets hit the entire node dies for a short period of time.

That's not true for most webhosts. They can manage hundreds of sites on a single hardware node with no issue, regardless of traffic due to... Well. A number of technologies that I'm not going to go into. But it's not that they're packing hundreds of clients into one server. It's that they're lacking scaling, caching, and the know how to manage it all.

[ErickS89]

AWS FTW!!

I've used hostgator in the past, nothing wrong with them as long as you know what you're doing.  I just prefer AWS these days. 

[Lumi]

That's not true for most webhosts. They can manage hundreds of sites on a single hardware node with no issue, regardless of traffic due to... Well. A number of technologies that I'm not going to go into. But it's not that they're packing hundreds of clients into one server. It's that they're lacking scaling, caching, and the know how to manage it all.

Unless its a massive webhost with some sort of round robbin system for shared hosting if you attack the node everything dies.

[Neil]

Unless its a massive webhost with some sort of round robbin system for shared hosting if you attack the node everything dies.

That's entirely untrue. You can attack a node all you want, and if the host isn't stupid, you will:

1. Get blocked at the firewall level.

2. The server will not punish all the users for one user being attacked. There are safeguards you can put in place to stop that from happening. It takes very little bandwidth and CPU to serve a simple resources reached page.

I'm an operations engineer/sysadmin and I've worked for Web hosts. I think I know what I'm talking about.

[Lumi]

That's entirely untrue. You can attack a node all you want, and if the host isn't stupid, you will:

1. Get blocked at the firewall level.

2. The server will not punish all the users for one user being attacked. There are safeguards you can put in place to stop that from happening. It takes very little bandwidth and CPU to serve a simple resources reached page.

I'm an operations engineer/sysadmin and I've worked for Web hosts. I think I know what I'm talking about.

Who the hell said I was talking about a l7 attack? Also if you try to use #1 in an argument against l4.

[Neil]

Who the hell said I was talking about a l7 attack? Also if you try to use #1 in an argument against l4.

Okay. So it's a layer 4 attack. Who fucking cares. Null route the host, drop the traffic. Not that hard.

There are automated mitigation techniques for a reason. Your arguments are entirely invalid.

[Lumi]

Okay. So it's a layer 4 attack. Who fucking cares. Null route the host, drop the traffic. Not that hard.

There are automated mitigation techniques for a reason. Your arguments are entirely invalid.

Automated null routing isn't instantaneous so the entire node would still drop for an amount of time.

[Neil]

Automated null routing isn't instantaneous so the entire node would still drop for an amount of time.

No. It wouldn't.

What world do you live in that an attack completely cripples a server? Are you hosting websites on a potato?

[Lumi]

No. It wouldn't.

What world do you live in that an attack completely cripples a server? Are you hosting websites on a potato?

lol, what world do you live in that a server can still manage to fulfill requests when it's getting pounded with say 20gbps+ after filtering (including ACL's, proprietary mitigation software, and the router it's on ability to even handle enough PPS). Sure you're an "operations engineer" but do you even know anything about networking?

[Neil]

lol, what world do you live in that a server can still manage to fulfill requests when it's getting pounded with say 20gbps+ after filtering (including ACL's, proprietary mitigation software, and the router it's on ability to even handle enough PPS). Sure you're an "operations engineer" but do you even know anything about networking?

Yes I do know networking. I'm telling you that you're an idiot if you think that every single sever crashes because of an attack on it. Sure, if the attack is big enough. But most attack vectors aren't even going to reach my server. Dns, ntp, etc. All filtered out before it hits the server.

But you're welcome to think that all servers crash because a script kiddie is running loic, if you so please.

[Lumi]

Yes I do know networking. I'm telling you that you're an idiot if you think that every single sever crashes because of an attack on it. Sure, if the attack is big enough. But most attack vectors aren't even going to reach my server. Dns, ntp, etc. All filtered out before it hits the server.

But you're welcome to think that all servers crash because a script kiddie is running loic, if you so please.

Apparently you're a complete idiot because you can't read. No where did I mention more than one node. First you think I'm talking about l7 now you think I'm talking about every server in a DC owned by a company. Please just do yourself a favor and stop responding. And ya dude a kid at home on a 10mbit connection can totally saturate a common for shared hosting node 1gbit port.

You're more than welcome to stay on your high horse pretending you know everything and putting words into peoples mouths though.

 

Another thing is amping is starting to phase out with the amount of exploits out every 12 year old and his brother has a botnet capable of sending mass quantities of raw l4 traffic.