"True" VPS Provider

NOYB

It's not so much what I "need" to do as what I want to do. Such as SELinux. And also not having to deal with all the little quirky difference because the kernel does this or that differently than the "real" deal.

Also assigning 4.4.4.4 as a DNS resolver and insisting that it is a resolver adds to my already less than being please with their quality of technical support. They are probably adequately capable but I get the impression that they are not candid about troubleshooting my issues and the resolutions. Feels like a 3rd world support organization.

So if I could find a "true" VPS for comparable price I'd likely switch.

Minimum of what I'm after is something like this.

CentOS 7 (The real thing, not a custom kernel, etc. The same official CentOS 7 images I download from centos.org and install locally.)
768 MB RAM
7 GB storage
XEON 2 GHz, 1 core (64-bit)
1 static IPv4 address, reverse & PTR

Typically run…
Apache Web Server
BIND DNS Server
Dovecot IMAP/POP3 Server
MySQL Database Server
Postfix Mail Server
SSH Server
OpenVPN
IP Tables
Webmin
Git Server

johnpoz

You need a kvm vps then.. You can install the OS you want via mounting the iso..

When you get that much ram you will get way more storage..

Check them out. I have been using them for years, just looked at my first invoice 08/17/2012
https://my.frantech.ca/aff.php?aff=941

I currently have 4 VPSes with them in different DCs of theirs.

NOYB

Taking a "real" VPS for a test drive with a "real" kernel. It feels so good compared to that OpenVZ thing I've been tolerating. Except that the assigned IPv4 address is being exploited for DNS amplification attacks. So running DNS server may not be a good idea. :( Though it is an authoritative only, no recursion. So maybe not a show stopper. Just kind of messy.

CentOS 7.3 1611
Linux 3.10.0-514.2.2.el7.centos.plus.x86_64

NOYB

They assigned a clean IP address to the VPS this morning. So DNS amplification attack exploit issue is alleviated. :)

It wasn't a total loss though. Because I did make use of the opportunity to learn BIND RRL (Response Rate Limiter).

johnpoz

So you using the one I linked too or a different provider?

NOYB

@johnpoz:

So you using the one I linked too or a different provider?

I looked at the one you linked. But read some pretty negative reviews (they were quite old though, so may no longer be relevant). Though one of them was regarding taking days to provision new VM and I couldn't find anything on their site about provisioning time/process. That was probably the biggest reason for test driving a different provider.

I like being able to signup and provision a system automatically on line and have it active in a matter of a few minutes. Otherwise by the time it is spun up my attention may be elsewhere.

The KVM I'm test driving is.
768 MB
50 GB
1 IPv4
Intel Xeon E312xx (Sandy Bridge), 2 cores

CentOS Linux 7.3.1611
Linux 3.10.0-514.2.2.el7.centos.plus.x86_64 on x86_64

For less than half the price of current provider's OpenVZ.
2 GB
10 GB
2 IPv4
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5675 @ 3.07GHz, 1 cores

CentOS Linux 7.3.1611
Linux 2.6.32-042stab120.16 on x86_64

johnpoz

Every vps I have signed up for on them has been ready in minutes.. Going back to 2012 when I first started using them, I have let some expire and then brought up new ones in different DCs of theirs.. etc..

I would not have suggested them if I did not have personal experience with them! Just out of curiosity, what are you paying for your current KVM vps your playing with?

NOYB

@johnpoz:

Just out of curiosity, what are you paying for your current KVM vps your playing with?

$5/mo. after 14 day "free" trial.

Their credit card verification method is something I've never run across before though. They make an initial $0.01 charge to verify card.

Oh another negative re: the current OpenVZ provider is they are only in Florida. I'm on the wet coast. So it's quite a hop. The KVM provider is multi location. So I selected LA.

johnpoz

Who are you using that is a pretty decent price.. Is that a kvm slice? You say 2 cores - so that is dedicated??

NOYB

@johnpoz:

Who are you using that is a pretty decent price.. Is that a kvm slice? You say 2 cores - so that is dedicated??

It is advertised as KVM on their web site. The processor info. is what Webmin reports. Have no idea if dedicated. But doubt it.

Aside from the DNS amplification exploit the only issues I've seen so far are some issues with their web manager. It seems kind of like it may be new and hasn't had the bugs wrung out yet. It also when selecting which DC a lot of them where listed as new and also not using the 3-way replication that they advertise. Seems like they may be in state of flux.

Don't want to publicize their name as I've only been test driving for a couple of days. I'll PM it too you. Sharing any issues you see would be appreciated.

johnpoz

yeah I might have to give 1 a 14 day trail… But the $5 a month is more than I am paying for my boxes. Even my kvm box that only has 128, so less than you have is only costing 25 a year..

NOYB

@johnpoz:

yeah I might have to give 1 a 14 day trail… But the $5 a month is more than I am paying for my boxes. Even my kvm box that only has 128, so less than you have is only costing 25 a year..

Even my old
CenOS 5 OpenVZ was using 140MB.
CentOS 7 (minimal) OpenVZ is using 216MB.
CentOS 7 KVM is using 275MB.
CentOS 7 VirtualBox is using 297MB.

Not sure that 128MB even meets the official minimum requirements for CentOS 5.

I'm not comfortable with any less than 768MB for my use.

anajames

Hey all, i do understand what a VPN is, but i have read and seen this word VPS. Can someone provide the core difference between these two.

johnpoz

Virtual Private Server.. google it ;)

They are not related - its apples and mushrooms..

128 is the men requirement for centos 5 with cli, gui would be 512.. Are you one of those gui people? ;)

Comes down to what your doing with it.. The 128 mb ones are just NS and vpn endpoints.. They don't normally do anything ;)

vpsram.png_thumb

NOYB

@johnpoz:

128 is the men requirement for centos 5 with cli, gui would be 512.. Are you one of those gui people? ;)

Comes down to what your doing with it.. The 128 mb ones are just NS and vpn endpoints.. They don't normally do anything ;)

CLI & Webmin
Posted a list earlier of what it's running.

NOYB

Up and running on the KVM VPS and the OpenVZ VPS is been "shutdown now" (note the missing "-r" shutdown option). ;)

It's faster than the OpenVZ was. It's even faster than my VirtualBox. Of course the VirtualBox is not running on a Zeon.

Only been about a week, but so far I'm liking the new home.

Now if I can just get the previous provider to cancel my service. No means of canceling services online. Have to submit a support ticket. And of course they drag their feet.

Been with them for 10+ years and will be just as glad to be rid of them as I was to get them in the first place. They were pretty good in the early days as a start-up. But been going downhill the last half dozen years. Was a huge step backwards when they went the OpenVZ route. Their prices have not remained competitive either.

anajames

@johnpoz:

Virtual Private Server.. google it ;)

They are not related - its apples and mushrooms..

128 is the men requirement for centos 5 with cli, gui would be 512.. Are you one of those gui people? ;)

Comes down to what your doing with it.. The 128 mb ones are just NS and vpn endpoints.. They don't normally do anything ;)

Hey, thank you for clearing it out.