At 02:48 PM 9/26/00 , Chris S wrote:
>we have a cable business line with one static ip (max. 3 static ips). i
>didn't want to ask them directly if we are able to do hosting until i knew
>a little more about what was needed. is there a way that i can set up my
>own DNS server so that i don't have to rely on them?
I had to sign an agreement which contained the prohibition, so maybe you
don't need to ask. The issue isn't enforcement so much as (1) without
their cooperation, you might not be able to even get started and (2) the
possibility that your sight might suddenly disappear if there is such a
clause. This would most likely happen because you were generating a lot of
traffic (i.e., becoming popular).
As for DNS, I think whoever owns the IP you use (your cable company) would
have to delegate DNS authority to you. So this is something you would have
to bring up with them. Also, I think you'll need at least 3 IP's (primary
DNS, secondary DNS, and web server). Or, I guess, you could use one of the
"dynamic domain" places (e.g., .dynip.com).
>what do you mean by 'co-located'?
>we don't want to host any major sites just yet. 2-3 pages each.
Well, it's more a matter of how big those 2-3 pages are and how often they
are downloaded... but it sounds like a cable connection will support that.
Here's a anecdote to gauge against: Our 128K ISDN line supported all our
usual traffic (mail is the biggest component) and an all-CGI, web-based
survey that took 3000 hits in 48 hours and something like 95% of the
respondents answered a question about server responsiveness as 'good' or
better (the server was the 486/66 I mentioned earlier). The dissenting 5%
tended to be geographically distant (e.g., Australia). Using my cable
connection, I have observed DL speeds of 150 KB/s while the ISDN line maxes
out around 13 KB/s.
-Alan
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
