Good company

Ted Sindzinski — Wed, 08 Nov 2000 22:07:07 +0000

ALthough I have never leased/co-located a server with Netinfra, their vice-prez. was a client of a company I use to work for (*cough solutionscripts cough*). Shortly after he became a client, I had a few talks with him regarding his company and servers. Through these talks about the technology, the plans, the current setup, ect.. I became rather convinced that Netinfra was and sitll is a great company.

I have a few friends using their servers who have found the speed to be really, really good. As for the tech support and other functions of the company, these friends are a little too advanced to be calling on any of that so I can't comment much on their response time. However, from all the dealings I've had with the company, I would highly recommend them for speed, pricing and quality.

jonese — Mon, 06 Nov 2000 21:22:59 +0000

Chad is SOO correct. i use http://www.tracert.com for all my traceroute. you can select many differant servers to start from etc. I only clicked the first USA on, hence my one report.

Chad Simper — Fri, 03 Nov 2000 17:53:23 +0000

I must (respectfully of course) disagree with Jonese ... I just did a tracert to netinfra.com as well and between my location (which is in Utah - near Colorado where Netinfra is based) and my DSL connection, my access time to the server was extremely well. The slowest hop was 120ms which was a connection that my local phone company has.

Netinfra's servers themselves were responding with 60ms access times.

Tracerts are excellent ways of determining connectivity, but you should perform as many as you can over all times of the day, and even from seperate connections if possible. What Jonese sees is completely different than what you (Mike) would see...

Jonese may have had slower responding results because of a slower connection to the Internet, because of a congested pipe that day, because the server he was contacting at the time was just under a lot of pressure for a few seconds, etc. etc. etc. Further, you really can't judge this as being Netinfra's fault because the pnap.net pipe looks like the one having the problems... Once one pipe has problems, the rest of the pipes are going to respond slower as well.

I am not shooting down Jonese's method at all nor am I defending Netinfra, because tracerts should definitly be done when searching for a host. Just don't make a judgement off of one single tracert.

jonese — Fri, 03 Nov 2000 16:53:26 +0000

michael,

the above traceroute shows the servers returning a 500+ ms response time. this is not acceptable. you want to look for the lowest possible tracert.

i'd suggesst looking around for someone closer to a backbone etc.

contact me offlist if you are interested in learning about the company i work for.

michael2 — Fri, 03 Nov 2000 09:58:43 +0000

Could someone explain the above traceroute info. I don't understand it or its significance.

Thanks again.

jonese — Thu, 02 Nov 2000 22:18:57 +0000

looking at this trace route i'd say no no no....

13 den2-core2-pos6-0.atlas.icix.net (165.117.56.26) 120 ms 135 ms 121 ms
14 den1-core1-s1-0-0.atlas.icix.net (165.117.60.153) 122 ms 122 ms 122 ms
15 internap-den-gw.digex.net (209.119.33.18) 125 ms 122 ms 123 ms
16 border3.ge3-0-bbnet2.den.pnap.net (216.52.40.71) 124 ms 122 ms 123 ms
17 coop-1.border3.den.pnap.net (216.52.42.102) 580 ms 575 ms 589 ms
18 199.45.130.33 (199.45.130.33) 955 ms 573 ms 591 ms
19 border-to-233-netinfrastructure.boulder.co.coop.net (199.45.130.94) 593 ms 589 ms 618 ms
20 www2.netinfra.com (207.174.151.28) 597 ms 583 ms 581 ms