Slashdot Mirror

I like Supermicro.

Don't like security, eh?

It's appears good, it's cloudflare.com not 127.0.0.1 cloudfront.net
https://www.robtex.com/dns-loo...

But does go through a lot of edge servers (can throttle network traffic to adjust loads).

Bail that answer that site is bad news, I posted too early search further I found this dire warning from Domain Registration
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/... and https://www.complaintsboard.co... first two searching eNom Inc.

Really sorry about that.

An OC3 might be $10K-$20K if you're way out in the boonies and need the telco to drag the tail to you. The large ISP's are present at major peering points, however. At those locations, wholesale bandwidth from a reputable vendor such as Level(3) can be had for less than $2/Mbps at gig commit; cheap Cogent bandwidth dropped below 50c/Mbps at gig commit a long time ago.http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1230059 The big ISP's are dealing with 10/40/100Gbps circuits. On top of that, a lot of what passes to and from an ISP's network is peering bandwidth. Nobody's paying the rates you suggest for bandwidth unless they're some small joint at the wrong end of an expensive telco provided circuit.

I do not typically see HTTP 503 error codes for static web pages so I am going to guess you are seeing the error for dynamic web pages. For dynamic webpages, a CDN is of limited usefulness.

Things to look into:

• For 1,000 concurrent visitors you may be having over 200 concurrent HTTP sessions at which point the Apache web server does not fair as well. The solution is to upgrade to a multi-threaded web server such a LiteSpeed Technologies web server (works with cPanel, Plesk, etc) or you could try nginx.
• Confirm the system is not running out of RAM. Have the manage web host check the logs from "sar" to see if the system is using a lot of swap space at the times you get 503 errors.
• Confirm the system is not waiting excessively for disk access. Have the manage web host check the logs from "sar" to see if the I/O Wait is high at the times you get 503 errors.
• If the application uses a back-end database server such as MySQL, the ask your manage web host to tune the server parameters (such as my.cnf). They can also enable slow query logging to monitor for queries which are causing performance problems such as table locking. Custom applications which incorrectly do SQL joins using non-indexed variables may need to be re-written to address the performance issues they cause. Usually getting a developer to correct any poor application code is the responsibility of the customer even with full management. However, the full management should allow you to find out what poor performing queries are being made.
• If the application causing 503 errors is written in PHP, ask the managed web host to enable a byte-code cache such as eAccelerator or APC.
• If the application causing 503 errors is a commercial application such a vBulletin then ask them for additional advise. The authors of the application will better be able to advise how to address issues with their own application than any web host can. They may be able to assist you in how best to interact with your managed web host to get things resolved.
• If the application causing 503 errors has an active community forum or other forms of support to get advice, then take advantage of it. Just like with commercial web applications, the application community will be able to give you the benefit of their experience that is specific to the application which will exceed the experience any generalized web host will have with it.

If you continue to have problems with your current web host, then the company I work for (Steadfast) does provide managed web servers and have been able to resolve these types of issues for other customers in the past. You can also get advise about other web hosting companies with managed web server solutions from the Web Hosting Talk forums. If you have a control panel such as cPanel, Interworx or Plesk, it should be fairly easy for you to migrate your websites between hosts. Otherwise, changing web hosts may open up another can of worms where you become responsible for transferring the web sites to the new host before being able to proceed further with addressing what is causing the 503 errors. Good luck.

Here's the post from the 2010 Linode hacking.

• 75 Broad Street
• 33 Whitehall
• nLayer at 882 3rd Ave
• Voxel/Internap at 111 8th Avenue
• XO, nLayer, Cogent, Verizon, Sidera Networks and AT&T at 882 3rd Ave
• 121 Varick

For discussions on this from people within the hosting industry, see http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1156920 ... interesting read.

I recently did some research into a related topic -- I was looking for hosts for a decent sized (200 GB+) database with generous bandwidth, on a shoestring budget (under $50/month, for the 2-3 machines I need).

First, choose your provider wisely. Your choice of provider may seem like it doesn't matter except for the pricing, but as your post about "unlimited" providers hints, it can and will become very important very quickly once the shit hits the fan (i.e. provider thinks you are using too much disk I/O, or too much bandwidth, or too much space, or whatever -- and promptly kicks you off).

Second, Slashdot actually isn't the best place to ask this question. Hang out in webhostingtalk for a while (e.g. this thread).

Finally, my recommendation for hosting provider: honelive. Take a look at their offerings, and particularly their specials. I jumped on the dedicated Intel Atom dual core, with 250GB storage, when it was $39/month a few months back. Today they are offering a dedicated Core i7 Quad Core with 24 GB RAM, 1TB disk, 5TB bandwidth, for $100/month. Yes you read that right -- these are dedicated machines, and these guys are for real. I sleep easier at night knowing I'm not going to wake up to an email of "we disabled your server because your VPS was using too much I/O and loading down our horribly oversold machines". It's my machine, I run what I want. I know VPSs are all the rage now, cloud computing yadda yadda yadda. And sure, they're great for hosting your personal photo gallery or blog. But take it from me, once you start burning through TBs of monthly bandwidth, and the disk I/O of a 200 GB database, they start looking flimsy real fast, and hosting providers get anxious to see you and your piddly monthly payment gone.

BTW I'm just a happy honelive customer, I have no affiliation with them, no referral codes in this post, etc. I've been burned by a lot of shady VPS providers. Don't get me wrong, there are some great providers (Linode) out there, but you will have to shell out the $$ for them, and I haven't found ANY reputable VPS provider providing the bang for the buck and stability I'm getting with honelive.

Also, I do pay for 2 or 3 other VPSs affiliated with my site, but the needs for these are comparatively tiny, so I suggest just hanging out on lowendbox and grabbing one of the deals there, if you need a few small VPSs with decent bandwidth. You can easily find several providers who will give you a few TB of bandwidth per month for around $5/month. I've used 5ite for such purposes, though I can only give them a lukewarm recommendation. I have a $2/month VPS from Securedragon right now for a similar purpose, and it works well enough (for a 100% expendable machine).

You'll get much better answers here:

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/index.php

if you can get by with the minimal resources...

hostigation kvm vps 128mb/5gb $20 a year via this deal:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com//showthread.php?t=1109937

I had a machine colocated at FDC in Chicago, at CBOT, for two years. Here is my take on their service from my personal experience. The service was cheap, and attractive to me at the time, for I was just getting my feet wet in colocating. I found the bandwidth at that time (2006-08) was terrible in consistency, and oversold. I guess what I am really trying to say is their network went down quicker, and more frequently, than a cheap street walker. When the network was up (as in their equipment not letting out the magic smoke, or maintenance degrading the service temporarily for upgrades), the DDOS attacks on the network were crippling and frequent. I found out quickly through other customers there, that it was a haven for botnets, and IRC servers, which were always at war with each other or someone else. As far as physical support to a machine (needing a reboot, help diagnose an issue such as bad network card/cable) the service was always prompt, and bang on. Due to the constant network issues though, I moved my box to Texas in late 2008 to a different provider, and I am much happier.

Things may have changed there since I have used them, but I do not know. They were in the middle of additional network and bandwidth upgrades when I left. Perhaps it is better now, I really do not know. I have read that they currently do not have a SLA (Service Level Agreement). Granted, you are looking for a VPS rather than colocation, but I felt it best to give you my experience from when I was a customer, for the network & bandwidth availability are important no matter where you are. I also suggest reading all the different opinions folks will post here, then research the options you are interested in. WebHostingTalk http://www.webhostingtalk.com/ is another useful tool for you in your research of a provider before making a final decision IMHO.

I rarely hear anyone say anything bad about Linode the company, but be warned that the uptime experience with Linode may vary dramatically depending on which DC you're out of. See: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1058700 as an example; Linode colocates there.

The problem with all of these cheap VPS providers is that they almost all operate out of some of the worst data centers in the country. I don't mean to pick on linode in particular but last i checked their west coast facility was hurricane electric, fremont 2. That facility is single homed and known for being just about the cheapest colocation money can buy anywhere on the planet. If you're curious about some of the issues HE FM2 experiences take a look at this thread: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1058700 As you move up the ranks in facilities the costs rise dramatically, "cheap" VPS's are a huge DDOS risk as people purchase them for all sorts of nefarious reasons, so unless they operate their own networks the high end data centers won't touch them with a 10' pole. If http://asn.cymru.com/cgi-bin/whois.cgi and check who they use for transport via robtex: http://www.robtex.com/ The easiest rule to follow: if hurricane electric or cogent are in the mix run and don't look back!

You should be asking on WHT, which is the best-known forum for discussing web hosting, VPS, and dedicated servers.

I would echo the linode suggestion, particularly if it's the first VPS you've ever used. However, they are not KVM. If you want KVM, try 6sync. Another fine choice is BuyVM, though you have to wait until they have stock, which is a minor media event.

I would ignore the suggestions to look at lowendbox, unless you are willing to trade price for stability (which is not always a bad tradeoff, just be sure to do it consciously)

This thread is worth a read regarding dyndns and their practises.

They recently bought everydns and editdns, offered existing users who paid or donated "free" accounts, and then once they bought it, went back on their word. the free accounts included a migration fee for domains, and the accounts were limited, so users would have to pay again to get the same level of service they may have paid for at editdns for example (and due to dyndns strange pricing where you have a limit of 75 subdomains on the standard paid account, you may have to pay them a significant amount of money)

Also worth noting, then editdns users expressed their concerns, dyndns were very quick to close down their old forum and place with a note to email their staff.

Worth noting that Hurrican Electric have a free dns service (http://dns.he.net) - with up to 50 domains allowed and it can operate as a secondary dns also. They also include a dynamic dns facility. There are some other free options left, but how long until dyndns buys them too ? :)

let me tell you as an industry insider in web hosting/datacenters that server = linux since a long time ago. the question is, which flavor of linux. the most used and accepted one so far is centos. those who want to handle the support bill use red hat enterprise. debian and clones, opensuse come after. ubuntu is just a new entry.

just have a look.

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/

community forum for hosting/it/datacenters. you can find all kinds of people from industry, ranging from (now the biggest datacenter in u.s.) softlayer, much lauded rackspace to obscure indian company to kids who are trying to do hosting with their mothers' credit cards.

Also have someone else host all your servers unless a file server is needed. There are plenty of good server hosts out there. For the web, depends on what you want. Pair is a top notch web host I used for many years. Top flight quality in every regard. Hostgator is who I use now to save some money and I'm perfectly satisfied. It works well, is reasonably fast, and they don't bitch that I do like 100GB of traffic a month.

Indeed. Hosting your own servers is just silly, considering the many (affordable) options out there.

As for specifics:

• HostGator -- Never used them myself, but seems to be fairly good for what they are: A massively oversold shared hosting. And remember: There's no such thing as unlimited bandwidth.
• DreamHost -- Much like HostGator, except opinions seems to be even more split. Many will recommend them - just as many will tell you horror story upon horror story.
  Seems like it's a good place to avoid for anything important.
• WebFaction -- Where I eventually ended up. (Supposedly) not oversold and full non-root shell access. Feature-wise the next step up would be a full-blown VPS. It's a UK company with UK support hours, but the servers are hosted with The Planet in Texas.
  Don't think I have seen anything but positive comments concerning them.
  (And yes - that's an affiliate link)

But go look here for more: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/

Namecheap isn't great. Their URL redirect/page parking IP addresses have been blacklisted before, and when this happens they are unresponsive and may even go so far as to blame the customer for the problem, telling them to stop using the redirect service.

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=544386
http://www.wickedfire.com/shooting-shit/54698-namecheap-shutting-down-domains.html
http://www.dnforum.com/f34/blacklist-status-thread-97021.html

I did read it already, what do you think? It was referenced in 4.5. BTW, the link is: https://www.burst.net/policy/contract.pdf

But as I said in http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=965094, this clause does not make sense. The same Exhibit B section states:

"(D) Offensive or Objectionable Material. BurstNET reserves the right to request you remove any material which BurstNET deems offensive, hurtful, or otherwise objectionable.
Failure to do so may result in blocking your site or termination of the Agreement by BurstNET Services."

In that case, blogetery was not even given the chance to delete the offending blog(s). Even if burst.net gives itself all powers (basically making the whole contract a total joke), it was 1) not legal (as in "required by a legal court order or Patriot Act request") for burst.net to take down the site, 2) a partial breach of 4.5 and Exhibit B (D) of the contract, and 3) a totally stupid act to take down 73,000 blogs when only a couple were being investigated by the FBI.

Burst.net should get all the blame and bad publicity it deserves for such an outrageous act. The whole blogosphere is posting comments asking everybody to stop working with burst.net, I totally agree.

Just read the linked thread by affiliateplex. Are slashdot commenters usually so hateful?
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=964013

Burst.net clearly takes no account of its own contract if it does not consider his customers responsible for handling the situation:
Paragraph 4.5 states: "Client shall be solely responsible for all content available on or through its site"

Many commenters said that burst.net had no choice in the matter, but I beg to differ. Burst.net should have redirected the FBI to the rightful contact, the owner of blogetery.
Many also accuse affiliateplex of having broken the law. If so, Facebook and Google Blogger have broken the law thousands of times for child porn. Were they shut down? Of course not, only the individual illegal/infringing blogs were shut down, not the whole service.
Others also say affiliateplex should monitor every post in every blog he hosts. What a stupid nonsense. Again, Facebook and Blogger don't monitor their blogs. Instead, they have a "Report this blog" button for readers to signal potentially illegal blogs. Only then do they take action to verify if the claim was justified.

I really feel sorry for affiliateplex, he certainly did not deserve both the shutdown of his hosting site and the hate comments, and he has all my sympathy and support.

So, the Burst.net guys get a request for information about a machine they host which has ~70k users, give or take. Instead of asking the box's sysadmin (who's their CLIENT), they pull the pin, then go on to mutter vague conspiracy-minded commentary such as "getting a refund is the least of his (the site owner/sysadmin) problems" on fora such as WHT (see http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=05a61aabdfcacdb369e1582aff4686a1&t=964013 ) Apparently the fact that he _received_ abuse complaints in the past was grounds to terminate his service; never mind the fact that he had SEVENTY THOUSAND USERS and acted on DMCA notifications and other abuse requests in a timely fashion, which is better than can be said about a lot of sites.

Had burst.net forwarded the request to the site owner (or even simply given the feds his name, and explained how he fit in) instead of disconnecting the machine, making borderline slanderous statements (such as 'he'll never get his data back' and 'a refund is the least of his worries right now',) they would have come out of this looking reasonably good. As it stands, you'd have to be completely brain-dead retarded to even think about giving them money.

Based on some searching (wayback and webhostingtalk) this guy has been booted from two other hosting companies since 2008.

See the ongoing thread @ http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=964013

This happened about a week ago. The owner of the single server (that's right, it was all on one single server, with no backups) posted to WebHostingTalk.com to complain because BurstNet wouldn't violate the government's order to keep quiet.

The authorities ordered BurstNet to take the server offline for what appeared to be very, very serious violations. Based on BurstNet's demeanor and seriousness when asked about the issue, it could be anything from national security to child porn. BurstNet also appears to have been hit with a gag order, as they've only made one (perhaps two) public comments on the situation, and absolutely refuse to make any more announcements.

Don't take my word for it - read up on the situation at the original WHT thread (which is now closed).

If it's national security and they fight back they could get killed, or snatched up and beaten/waterboarded. Or they could just be arrested without charge and put in prison.

So nobody is going to mess with the government. The best and only option in this situation is to keep your mouth shut, call your lawyer, and hope that it can be sorted out within the legal system.

This happened about a week ago. The owner of the single server (that's right, it was all on one single server, with no backups) posted to WebHostingTalk.com to complain because BurstNet wouldn't violate the government's order to keep quiet.

The authorities ordered BurstNet to take the server offline for what appeared to be very, very serious violations. Based on BurstNet's demeanor and seriousness when asked about the issue, it could be anything from national security to child porn. BurstNet also appears to have been hit with a gag order, as they've only made one (perhaps two) public comments on the situation, and absolutely refuse to make any more announcements.

Don't take my word for it - read up on the situation at the original WHT thread (which is now closed).

• Backups. Make them. Test them. Store multiple versions & copies of them.
• Redundancy. Disks fail. Servers crash. If your site goes down, you'll want to get it back in a hurry.
• If you don't want to roll your own admin with a VPS or a dedicated / colocation server, get cozy with the notion of shared hosting.
  • Shared hosting is a shared resource.
  • If your neighbor is crushing the machine, your site is getting crushed.
  • If your neighbor and/or admin's software/policies allow the box to get owned, your stuff can get owned.
  • Stuff can be changed at will, often without notice to you. Maybe another customer needed something. Maybe an update needed to be pushed...
• Price. There is such a thing as paying too much and there is such a thing as paying too little. Do not be a cheap ass, especially if you need support.
• Unlimited X. There is no such thing as "unlimited" anything in the web hosting business. Some limits are more finite than others. Figure out what they are...
• Storage. Storage can be cheap, but often it is not. Do not argue with your web host and say that you can buy a cheap ass 1TB drive for $X. If you dislike their prices, vote with your money.
• Chat with the sales, support, and billing departments. Do you feel comfortable with them? Are they robots, or real, live human beings? Is it a small company, or a corporation?
• Treat your support people with courtesy and respect. Your $15/month website is not worth $1,000,000/hour. If it was, maybe you should have bought better hosting/support/redundancy.

Finally, do your research and educate yourself! There are a lot of good review websites out there. Web Hosting Talk for instance...

DreamHost has been great to me. You do get what you pay for though. At $10 a month, I don't feel like I can complain too much. I did have a few problems with the server I was on, but three support tickets later and I got on a brand new server they had just provisioned, and its been awesome.

I'll also point out that webhostingtalk.com is a great resource for web hosting reviews and the like. It's where I've found multiple hosts I've used.

Don't ever go by web sites that rank the top 10 providers. Those are all paid placements.
Sometimes good providers turn bad. Forums provide the most up to date info.
I've found this site to provide useful info: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/
Just go with the opinions of those with lots of posts that don't appear to be promoting a single agenda.

AFAIK this is part of one of the SSH blocker efforts, DenyHosts. I found you need to change the window failed attacks are detected in as the people trying to break in appear aware of the current default (at least, that's what my logfiles appeared to suggest).

However, there are more things you can do, and I agree that just changing port numbers makes an enormous difference.

Unlimited is obviously a gimmick, as there are limits to anything. Most "unlimited" plans have rules about usage, be it CPU or other, that allows the host to suspend the account. "unlimited" plans that cost $9.95 a month should be viewed with a critical eye. You get what you pay for with hosting. Before buying a hosting plan do some research on what hosts provide quality service, what price they charge, and what can be expected in terms of support. Oh, and always keep local backups of your data, and never sign up for an extended contract.

1&1 does not have a great reputation on www.webhostingtalk.com. Anyone with an interest in reading about the perils of unlimited plans (or hosting in general) should browse around that site.

Ligesh has (had) a blog with an about page. Sounds a bit f**** up.

A number of hosts have been hit by this, see e.g. this post at WHT. The software itself is apparently closed source (i.e. obfuscated source). Based on what I read, it was also quite cheap (speculations were ~50 cents for a single VPS), so most budget VPS providers used it.

This includes 2host, where I got an account a few days back. A few hours later I got an e-mail saying they disabled the HyperVM panel. Nice.

It was actually leaked years ago about the battery. It's just the first time Google is talking about it. For example: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=492779 This is like Israel's nuclear capabilities. Everyone knows they have it, but they officially decline to discuss it.

All of the feedback and suggestions here are great. Thanks for the support and suggestions. You can read the latest on what's going on over at WHT here - http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=729727 Rob Farrell iNET Interactive

show me an example of Cogent initiating a de-peering...

http://gigaom.com/2008/03/14/the-telia-cogent-spat-could-ruin-web-for-many/

http://www.backbone-news.com/2008/03/18/cogenttelia-peering-dispute-update/

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?p=5015857

Would you like some ketchup on that crow before you eat it? ;-)

None of these are proof of Cognet initiating a de-peering. One is a press release from Telia saying Cognent are being pricks, One is from Cognet saying Telia are being pricks, and the other is a forum where people are discussing whether or not it is Telia or Cognet that are being pricks.

show me an example of Cogent initiating a de-peering...

http://gigaom.com/2008/03/14/the-telia-cogent-spat-could-ruin-web-for-many/

http://www.backbone-news.com/2008/03/18/cogenttelia-peering-dispute-update/

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?p=5015857

Would you like some ketchup on that crow before you eat it? ;-)

According to this thread:
webhosting talk
They were expecting peering issues to come up with cogent.

There is even speculation that Georgians themselves crashed/trashed their OWN systems to exploit the current bad image Putin (yes, PUTIN is calling the shots, not Medvedev. Moreover, and ironically, a US-based outfit in, guess where... GEORGIA (yes, the state) offered and took on the hosting for the Georgian President's web site. Guess what? It wasn't working out. It was still being crashed/taken down. So, another party (seems to be Estonia) is helping out.

first, after the estonia shit, i wouldnt believe anything to the contrary of russia doing it itself. government at least.

second, the us datacenter that offered to host president's website has an office doing business in georgia, AND had one of their employees who was on vacation stranded there due to war when it happened. so the rescue started :

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=714632
http://www.circleid.com/posts/russian_cyber_attack_on_georgia/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080811/ap_on_hi_te/tec_georgia_internet

here : http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=714632 these are the people working at that atlanta web host, hosting georgian president's site from russian bastardiness. they havent had enough sleep in the few days but they made a fight of principle out of it.

real degradation of patch-download time if you tried.

Why the Upstream is still there, sitting unused in AT&T's cabling... they can just sell the upstream to Blizzard... problem solved they make so much money!

AT some point upstream becomes downstream so the two are equal (in specific instances there are compromises but for the vast majority...)

So how come we get less upstream? I have NEVER heard a good answer to this question.

Example: These guys will UPLOAD 20,000GB of data for $5.95 a month. (one of?)The best Canadian ISP(s) can only offer 200 GB of up/down for $29.95.

Where does this division of upstream and downstream take place?

The only thing that's clear is net neutrality is mythical, there is a system in place to stop non-commercial users being content hosts and has been since dialup.

I have to strongly agree with the "don't" comment. The market is too saturated and margins are too low. BUT, if you are also doing web development, then some money can be made. Like some others suggested, get a reseller account from a reputable company. Let them handle the hosting and you concentrate on the web design. Try http://www.webhostingtalk.com/ for some reseller hosting reviews.

There are many reference websites on the subject. One I used in the past is http://www.webhostingtalk.com/.

Yes, TFA is sparse on the details, but if this is the attack, it is detected by several anti-virus packages.

That rootkit is very stealthy. It might most easily be detected by watching your httpd server logs for random javascript files being served. Some details here.

Note: I don't know that the above is the exploit described in TFA. I believe this subject was discussed earlier on slashdot. It was in The Reg as well.

Some additional reports from earlier this week and previous...

http://blog.trendmicro.com/e-commerce-sites-invaded/

http://www.scmagazineus.com/Attack-injects-malicious-JavaScript-into-e-commerce-sites/article/104206

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/11/mysterious_web_infection/

http://www.cpanel.net/security/notes/random_js_toolkit.html

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?date=2008-01-18

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?date=2008-01-14

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?p=4902045

Other info as of last week:

Various discussions:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=651748
(useful discussion starts on page 3 or so)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/11/mysterious_web_infection/
(describes the inability of ScanSafe to work out what's happening)
Trend have a piece on their blog:
http://blog.trendmicro.com/e-commerce-sites-invaded/
SANS/ISC
http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?storyid=3834&rss

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=649839

Check out the thread.. we've organized a class action lawsuit. http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?p=4741648

As another Jatol user whose site went down, I would strongly advise at least lining up a new host. Following the thread on webhostingtalk, http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=632124 I suspect that things will get worse before they get better. If you have a new host lined up, then if/when (probbly when) your site goes down, you can make a quick switchover. Jatol registered their sites through OnlineNIC.com, who have been quite helpful in changing over DNS info (as long as you are the owner of the domain). Good luck. DanK

I've been through it, and I had a bunch of clients hosted on a reseller account. Thankfully I had backups, but it still inconvenienced my clients for a few days while DNS changes took effect and I had to spend those 2 sleepless days uploading and configuring things from backup. It was pure hell, and I prefer to call them HELLohost.com. In a way, I'm happy they went out of business, the owner was a jerk.

Read about it here:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=492952

There are VPS plans for only $5/mo, although they get tight with resources in that price range.

There are various vps comparison pages out there, such as as well as . Personally, I'm affiliated with VPS Village.