If a host claims to have their own server, can they offer unlimited transfer?

[curiousity]

There is a host called 2MHost.com that offers unlimited transfer and claims that they own their own server? Well, does this mean that they can give away unlimited bandwidth if they own a server? I don't understand where bandwidth comes from. Who owns bandwidth? Who sell bandwidth? Is there a company that actually sell bandwidth? Who regulate bandwidth? The subject of bandwidth is still a little unclear to me. Hope someone can give me some pointers. Thanks.

[akersche]

own serves doesn't mean unlimited bandwith!!!
must hosts that claim that, will make problems if you use too much bandwith...

bandwith: is the amount of data transfered to and from the internet.
isp give you connection to the internet with bandwith.
bandwith is also a question how good the host is connected to the internet...

hope i could give you an idea of the topic

[Chicken]

Bandwidth ; a data transmission rate.

The maximum amount of information (data) that can be transmitted along a channel in a given period of time (bits/second).


To explain it a bit further, you can think of how you are connected to the internet. Let's say your computer is connected with a 56K modem via the phone line, to your ISP. Your ISP may not place restrictions on how many MP3's you can download (how much data), and your biggest limit is speed, since (per hour, month, etc.) you can only download so many MP3's (the data). It might take 45 minutes to download a 3.5 MB file.

Technically, a 56K dialup will give you somewhere around 40 Kbps which would only allow you to transfer approx. 13.5 GB total for the whole month, and that's full out downloading, all month long, constantly.

Now, let's increase the bandwidth. You get DSL or cable. You can now download that same MP3 faster (3.5 MB file in 30 seconds). As you can probably guess, you'd be able to download more than 13.5 GB during a month.

So you can see that the amount of data that can be moved depends on the capability of the line (among other things, but for our purpose, we're just covering the line itself). As you can see, there are limits to the amount of data that can pass through the line, no getting around that.

Another key point that should not be overlooked is, "in a given period of time". In the examples above, you can see that less data is being passed per second with the 56K connection than with the DSL connection. All of this is *generally* just a smaller scale of what goes on with hosting. I say *generally* because you've probably heard of hosts who host off of DSL or cable lines.

If all of this is just too confusing, then another way of looking at it is like comparing a small garden hose with a fire hose (used by firemen to put out fires). Less water in total and less water at one time can pass through the garden hose than the fire hose. This is why firemen don't use garden hoses to put out fires, and why hosts don't generally use dialup or DSL connections to host sites.

It is the speed of the line that affects the total capacity (the amount of data that can pass through per second, month, etc.).

Normally, if you need a connection, you'd put your server in a facility that is already connected (data center or commonly called NOC). No sense reinventing the wheel. This is called colocation. You can also rent partial, full, etc., racks at the data center.

If you want to run your own pipe into the data center or possibly build your own data center, you'll need to contact a distributor or AT&T, UUNET, Sprint, etc. directly. No matter what you order however, it *will* have a limit.

Hope that helps...

[curiousity]

Originally posted by Chicken
Bandwidth ; a data transmission rate.
If you want to run your own pipe into the data center or possibly build your own data center, you'll need to contact a distributor or AT&T, UUNET, Sprint, etc. directly. No matter what you order however, it *will* have a limit.

Hope that helps...

Chicken,

Thanks for clearing that up. Now getting back to one of my concern. 2Mhost.com claims that they own their own server and is offering "unlimited" transfer. This is untrustworty right? I have heard so many warnings about the "unlimited" taboo. This is a cheap host but I am just being cautious.

[akersche]

as i said, i wouldn't go with unlimited.
unless you think it's really cheap and won't use too much bandwith... and have not got a critical business page...

[besta]

Unlimited is physically impossible. If you are using a lot of bandwidth. Then you are very likely to get your account terminated or suspended. They may ask you to switch host or pay more for what you use.

[Chicken]

Originally posted by curiousity
Thanks for clearing that up. Now getting back to one of my concern. 2Mhost.com claims that they own their own server and is offering "unlimited" transfer. This is untrustworty right?

Thing is, there is a limit, they just aren't defining what it is. You'll find out when they decide that you've crossed whatever boundry they aren't defining. I've seen hosts who claim to offer 'unlimited' transfer, only to define it later in the TOS as, "up to 1 GB/mo".

Know what you are getting, make sure it sounds reasonable. Bandwidth is the largest on-going expense a host has, and they aren't going to give away the whole farm for $2/mo. when it might cost them $700/mo. Sure hosts play the odds a bit, but if you go with a host that clearly defines what you get for $x/mo., you will be better off.

I'd personally also go with a host that knows how to properly set up a domain. See: http://2mhost.com/

Aside from impossible claims, they do seem to lease a server (at least one) at VDI through interserver.net but one would think their $1.50/mo package would be the cheapest of many packages they offer.

It is cheap and if you sign up, I'd expect $1.50/mo's worth of service and not complain is support was slow, inadequate, or servers were packed, etc. If you don't experience any of this, then you've found yourself a bargin, and when you use too much, you'll find out quickly that you have to make other arrangements.

[gyrbo]

Originally posted by Chicken
I'd personally also go with a host that knows how to properly set up a domain. See: http://2mhost.com/
What's wrong whith that site?

[Todd]

I think he is referring to how the domain only works with the www. in front of it. He's saying that the host should have set it up to work both ways.

[Chicken]

I was, though Digital Nation never seemed to cae about that either, and they still don't now thet they've been bought out: http://dn.com

I personally just don't get why you *wouldn't* throw an A Record on the zone file...