All new e-mails have been automatically tagged as "too late" by the system since 11 am.
If the number of VMs active so far and still to be activated is not sufficient for my purposes, I may come back to these requests. At the moment, however, it doesn't look like that will happen.
@RapToN said:
All new e-mails have been automatically tagged as "too late" by the system since 11 am.
If the number of VMs active so far and still to be activated is not sufficient for my purposes, I may come back to these requests. At the moment, however, it doesn't look like that will happen.
Since I don't want to open a separate thread on this topic, and the topic fits the offer here, I'm taking this thread a little out of context and hope that one or the other will express their opinion despite the inappropriate title.
One issue that has not yet been finally clarified with the storage offers is traffic billing.
There are actually three models that could come into question here:
Fair use, as is used for all other offers (however, some usage scenarios are excluded here that seem to make sense for storage systems).
Fixed traffic limit measured against available storage (1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic, 8 TB storage = 16 TB traffic) on a shared 10G connection.
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
@RapToN said:
Since I don't want to open a separate thread on this topic, and the topic fits the offer here, I'm taking this thread a little out of context and hope that one or the other will express their opinion despite the inappropriate title.
One issue that has not yet been finally clarified with the storage offers is traffic billing.
There are actually three models that could come into question here:
Fair use, as is used for all other offers (however, some usage scenarios are excluded here that seem to make sense for storage systems).
Fixed traffic limit measured against available storage (1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic, 8 TB storage = 16 TB traffic) on a shared 10G connection.
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
Wich one would you prefere?
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
I prefer this
@RapToN said:
Since I don't want to open a separate thread on this topic, and the topic fits the offer here, I'm taking this thread a little out of context and hope that one or the other will express their opinion despite the inappropriate title.
One issue that has not yet been finally clarified with the storage offers is traffic billing.
There are actually three models that could come into question here:
Fair use, as is used for all other offers (however, some usage scenarios are excluded here that seem to make sense for storage systems).
Fixed traffic limit measured against available storage (1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic, 8 TB storage = 16 TB traffic) on a shared 10G connection.
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
Wich one would you prefere?
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
@RapToN said:
Since I don't want to open a separate thread on this topic, and the topic fits the offer here, I'm taking this thread a little out of context and hope that one or the other will express their opinion despite the inappropriate title.
One issue that has not yet been finally clarified with the storage offers is traffic billing.
There are actually three models that could come into question here:
Fair use, as is used for all other offers (however, some usage scenarios are excluded here that seem to make sense for storage systems).
Fixed traffic limit measured against available storage (1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic, 8 TB storage = 16 TB traffic) on a shared 10G connection.
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
Wich one would you prefere?
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
I prefer this
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
@RapToN said:
Since I don't want to open a separate thread on this topic, and the topic fits the offer here, I'm taking this thread a little out of context and hope that one or the other will express their opinion despite the inappropriate title.
One issue that has not yet been finally clarified with the storage offers is traffic billing.
There are actually three models that could come into question here:
Fair use, as is used for all other offers (however, some usage scenarios are excluded here that seem to make sense for storage systems).
Fixed traffic limit measured against available storage (1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic, 8 TB storage = 16 TB traffic) on a shared 10G connection.
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
Wich one would you prefere?
Would be more prefer with "Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)"
Since this means I can testing on transferring data from my cloud drive and share files/others, even with huge files
@RapToN said:
Since I don't want to open a separate thread on this topic, and the topic fits the offer here, I'm taking this thread a little out of context and hope that one or the other will express their opinion despite the inappropriate title.
One issue that has not yet been finally clarified with the storage offers is traffic billing.
There are actually three models that could come into question here:
Fair use, as is used for all other offers (however, some usage scenarios are excluded here that seem to make sense for storage systems).
Fixed traffic limit measured against available storage (1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic, 8 TB storage = 16 TB traffic) on a shared 10G connection.
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
Wich one would you prefere?
1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic on a shared 10G connection, after exceeded 2T, then Unlimited traffic @100 MBit/s
Fixed traffic limit measured against available storage (1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic, 8 TB storage = 16 TB traffic) on a shared 10G connection.
Would use it for backups thus I can estimate about the bandwidth needed. Automatic collection for over usage would be good then or speed limit to like 100mbits until end of month.
Since my team has just pointed out to me that a lot of the customers from this offer seems only to install VPN services, I would like to publicly point out that we could and will delete such systems without warning.
If the intent is backups, 2x the storage as a bandwidth cap would be sufficient. Ability to purchase additional bandwidth would be preferable, and I would greatly prefer being limited to 10Mbit/s rather than being cut off entirely.
Port limiting is.. frustrating at times. It's nice being able to burst when necessary.
@RapToN said:
Since my team has just pointed out to me that a lot of the customers from this offer seems only to install VPN services, I would like to publicly point out that we could and will delete such systems without warning.
@RapToN said:
Since my team has just pointed out to me that a lot of the customers from this offer seems only to install VPN services, I would like to publicly point out that we could and will delete such systems without warning.
Hmm, kinda interesting, install only a VPN on a 1TB storage VPS? What a waste. IMO
@RapToN said:
Since my team has just pointed out to me that a lot of the customers from this offer seems only to install VPN services, I would like to publicly point out that we could and will delete such systems without warning.
Hmm, kinda interesting, install only a VPN on a 1TB storage VPS? What a waste. IMO
There is a case, people run NFS over VPN (wireguard/openvpn) I think.
@RapToN said:
Since my team has just pointed out to me that a lot of the customers from this offer seems only to install VPN services, I would like to publicly point out that we could and will delete such systems without warning.
So these systems are for storage and backup only? You want data?
Comments
Email has been sent. The email address and user name are the same as those of the forum
Sent the mail. Please check.Thanks!
All new e-mails have been automatically tagged as "too late" by the system since 11 am.
If the number of VMs active so far and still to be activated is not sufficient for my purposes, I may come back to these requests. At the moment, however, it doesn't look like that will happen.
Thank you for your answer. Oh, I see.
i want it, but restrict for my country
https://microlxc.net/index.php?p=deploy
One thing I can say with 100% certainty: no one was ever rejected because of their nationality or place of residence by KTS24.com!
I'm not quite sure what you want to tell us and so I hope I haven't completely misunderstood.
feel free to spank him, he'll like that.
Possible at any time, free of charge.
Address is on the website. Just ring the bell and ask for the belt
Email sent. Thanks.
Since I don't want to open a separate thread on this topic, and the topic fits the offer here, I'm taking this thread a little out of context and hope that one or the other will express their opinion despite the inappropriate title.
One issue that has not yet been finally clarified with the storage offers is traffic billing.
There are actually three models that could come into question here:
Wich one would you prefere?
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
I prefer this
Unlimited traffic
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
Email has been sent. The email address and user name are the same as those of the forum
Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)
Would be more prefer with "Unlimited traffic. Limited by a shared network port. (100 MBit/s, 500 MBit/s and GBit/s would probably be available there)"
Since this means I can testing on transferring data from my cloud drive and share files/others, even with huge files
1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic on a shared 10G connection, after exceeded 2T, then Unlimited traffic @100 MBit/s
Would use it for backups thus I can estimate about the bandwidth needed. Automatic collection for over usage would be good then or speed limit to like 100mbits until end of month.
That will not happen, because we would have to raise the prices extremely.
If we go down this route, we will completely cut off connections after the traffic has been used up or limit the bandwidth to about 10 MBit/s.
Since my team has just pointed out to me that a lot of the customers from this offer seems only to install VPN services, I would like to publicly point out that we could and will delete such systems without warning.
The email sent, please check it. Thanks!
For backups, fixed bandwidth with some possibly of buying an emergency add-on is best. If you offer unlimited bandwidth you will be hosting seedboxes.
If the intent is backups, 2x the storage as a bandwidth cap would be sufficient. Ability to purchase additional bandwidth would be preferable, and I would greatly prefer being limited to 10Mbit/s rather than being cut off entirely.
Port limiting is.. frustrating at times. It's nice being able to burst when necessary.
ur so pretty
Erisa
Erisa
what about torrents?
Why?
Pretty Women
https://microlxc.net/index.php?p=deploy
Hmm, kinda interesting, install only a VPN on a 1TB storage VPS? What a waste. IMO
Fixed traffic limit measured against available storage (1 TB storage = 2 TB traffic, 8 TB storage = 16 TB traffic) on a shared 10G connection.
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
Email sent. Thank you!> @jason5545 said:
There is a case, people run NFS over VPN (wireguard/openvpn) I think.
So these systems are for storage and backup only? You want data?