Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bandwidth Limiting Policies for Web Hosting?

Posted by Cliff on from the throttling-back dept.

Silas asks: "I run a small website development and hosting company. We're trying to develop creative, fair, but standard policies in limiting the bandwidth of our individual hosting accounts. I seek the opinions of Slashdot readers who have experience as hosting providers or hosting users. More details below. We're running Apache, and have pretty much decided on using mod_throttle as our bandwidth limiting technology. I know it's not everyone's favorite, but it looks great for us. We have less than 200 domains being hosted, all with varying degrees of bandwidth requirements. As you might suspect, we've got our own ideas and have done our own research about the answers to these, but now I'm interested in yours."

"The basic question is 'what's fair and standard' in these areas:

  • Our two hosting packages offer 5 GIG/month and 10GIG/month respectively, with the option to upgrade in $5 per 1 GIG/month increments. Other hosting providers seem to be all over the board - what's the average hosting account want/need?
  • The policy that seems common is 'allow a certain amount of data to go through in a certain time period, and then start rejecting requests until the end of the time period'. Is that fair? What policies do other hosts use? When is it appropriate to delay the response to a request instead of rejecting it?
  • What should the user be able to do automatically in terms of upgrading/controlling their bandwidth usage? If a user is fine with 5 GIG/month but then gets slashdotted, what should their options be (right away, within 24 hours, etc.)?
We know we're not a powerhouse hosting company, and we know we can't compete with the big players in this industry, so please avoid comparisons/critiques based solely on price points, as we'll likely never be able to match the bulk hosters in that area. We're focused on excellent customer service and convenience to our design clients."

6 of 30 comments (clear)

  1. I'd LIKE a cap on my accounts. by zulux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I could set a cap on some of my accounts - I'd like it: I woulden't get a huge bill at the end of the month for over use if any of my sites got 'slashdoted.'

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  2. Dear Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Dear slashdot,
    I don't really have a problem. I use mod_throttle for bandwidth limiting and I love it. What do you use?
    Also, now I will plug my company and get some free advertising on Slashdot's front page. Actually, I paid for this Slashvertisement, but don't tell anybody that!

    Sincerely,
    SlashLamer

  3. Policies by coene · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I cannot speak to the cost of bandwidth, which is one of your concerns.. However -- there are a few simple things that customers really like:

    1) Automatic cut-off. If a customer has 5GB/Month, and cannot afford more, make sure their site goes unavailable and they are not billed. You do NOT need to continue service, they understand! Just make sure point 2 is made...

    2) Notification of cut-off. If above customer runs out, they want to know! Make sure they get an e-mail, but more preferrably a call. It's important, very important!

    3) Options for automatically extending the plan. Make sure that customers have the option to have their bandwidth upgraded (of course at additional cost) automatically. This is something a lot of customers will ask about, the type of customers who never want their site to go down, regardless if it costs them. Many customers think "More traffic, more profits", and if their site goes down due to exceeded bandwidth usage, they will think its your fault.

    4) Be upfront with all of these issues. Many providers arent verbose enough with customers, and it ends up with them being confused. By laying it all on the table, they will see the above strategy and they will like it. It gives them options that are very important.

    1. Re:Policies by Gerry+Gleason · · Score: 4, Insightful
      That's exactly right. Flexible policies taylored to the individual customer's needs, and good communication when (ideally, before) the limits are hit. Some customers would love to be slashdotted as long as their site can scale to handle it, they want all the page views they can get. If you could be hitting the limits of your system resources as well as bandwidth during a traffic peak, then you are also going to have to take care that one customer spiking doesn't take out the rest that are sharing some other resource.

      Also, ask your customers what is most important to them. It will vary, and you will find out what to spend your time and efforts on to make them happy.

  4. Re:My solution by MattCohn.com · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now, there is some truth in this. I would moderate +1 Insightful but I thought to just comment instead and let other people mod. There was a story (I can't find it) where slashdot linked to a site hosted on a shared server, and the owner of the site posted an e-mail from his hosting company basicly saying "Sorry, buh-bye". They did make a good point, that the server had crashed over 4 times that day... but it seems like since it was already over canceling the account was pointless.

    I would think that if you set up creative policies, it should allow for DOS-like conditions as long as they were one-time, and not the fault of the site's owner. Now I'm not trying to flame/troll slashdot, but I'm quite sure the continued reckless linking will continue for the imediate future, and I would hate to be a site owner talking to an IT department after a mid-day slashdoting.

  5. My experiences from a user perspective by beebware · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Personally, I run a high-bandwidth site and have had a few qualms finding a host. I've now settled on Positive Internet here in the UK because of their 'fair' bandwidth/process usage policy. Basically, they have no 'fixed' limits - therefore if your little site gets slashdotted one day (or, as mine did with my previous host, get featured on national television) and has a 'spurt' for a day or so, then they won't mind. But if (as I eventually ended up doing) you consume a significant part of their bandwidth/processor usage (I was constantly in the top 10% on one of their shared servers - and this is for months on end), then they contact you and offer you a 'more suitable product'. I've now got my own dedicated server hosted by them (and, therefore, can eat up as much processor usage as I like), and they'll inform me if I eat up massive limits of bandwidth.
    What I guess I'm practically saying, is try for 'soft-limits'. If you have a 'hard limit' of 5Gb/month and someone uses up 5.01Gb in a single month (previous months were less than 2Gb) - would you want to loose their custom? Ok, if the next month is also 5.01Gb (or higher) - then it's "contact customer" time - but just "arbitarily shutting down sites" is, IMHO, not a good idea (unless, of course, they are causing _significant_ harm to your business: ie saturating more than 60% of your pipe on their own - but you should have really noticed that before hand _or_ check the source of the referers: it may just be a spike for an hour or two due to slashdot or similar).