On Friday Microsoft changed its DNS so that requests for www.microsoft.com no longer resolve to machines on Microsoft’s own network, but instead are handled by
the Akamai caching system, which runs Linux.
Netcraft measure and makes available the response times of fifty two leading hosting providers' sites The performance measurements are made at fifteen minute intervals from four separate points around the internet, and averages are calculated over the immediately preceding 24 hour period.
Ranking by Failed Requests and Connection time, June 30th - July 31st
A summary showing the ten providers whose sites experienced the fewest failed requests and the fasest connection times during July is shown above.
Overnight, microsoft.com has suffered an outage
of a little over an hour. Microsoft have posted
to the effect that this was caused by a [presumably non-http] denial of service that is not associated with any known vulnerability in Microsoft's own software. Speculation on Information Week
that the outage might be part of a broader attack on internet infrastructure or linked to the start of the Defcon
conference seems implausible, as only one other Fortune 100
site has shown an outage in the last 24 hours. Three of the 52 leading hosting providers
monitored by Netcraft are showing outages in the last 24 hours, but all three are outside the US.
Netcraft measure and makes available the response times of fifty leading hosting providers' sites The performance measurements are made at fifteen minute intervals from four separate points around the internet, and averages are calculated over the immediately preceding 24 hour period.
Ranking by Failed Requests and Connection time, May 31st - June 30th
A summary showing the ten providers whose sites experienced the fewest failed requests and the fasest connection times during June is shown above. 31 of the 50 providers went through the month without suffering an outage.
Buying a dedicated server or moving a site to a new network provider can be a stab in the dark in that it is often not easy to see the quality and reliability of the provider’s network performance until after the purchase has been made.
Netcraft’s view is that lack of transparency on network performance and outages harms the whole industry, both consumers and providers.
Just as the customer suffers from not being able to make an informed choice between suppliers taking into consideration network response times as well as price, vendors with fast and reliable networks have no easy way of empirically showing the prospect the relative quality of service of their network relative to other players in the market.
Ignorance plays into the hands of the companies investing less in their networks, since they will be better able to discount, and their longer response times and network outages will be less obvious to the customer.
More widespread knowledge helps the industry as a whole, because better informed customers are more willing to pay more for superior connectivity, and the extra revenue coming into the industry can be invested in further improving resilience, performance, and support creating a virtuous circle.
Key metrics include;
- fewer outages – no one wants to be on a network that suffers frequent loss of connectivity.
- Shorter outages - customers will be more tolerant of short outages which may be operationally difficult to avoid;
- faster response times - the shorter the response times, the better.
Netcraft is measuring and making available the response times of fifty leading hosting providers' sites
to give an indication of the relative and absolute response times currently available in the industry. The performance measurements are made at fifteen minute intervals from four separate points around the internet, and averages are calculated over the immediately preceding 24 hour period.
Ranking by failed requests and connection time, 14:00 GMT, June 24th
Using the performance of a hosting providers own site to determine the performance of the hosting companies network is only indicative. By default the sites are ranked in order of fewest failed requests, and shortest time to connect, in order to give the clearest indication of network capacity and congestion, with the least impact from the performance of the companies’ own web servers, though it is possible to sort by any column by clicking on the column heading.
If you are using the table as a guide when choosing where to locate a dedicated or collocated server, remember that connection times fluctuate continually, and only hundredths of a second separate the top companies. Avoiding companies showing prolonged outages is likely to be a better strategy than necessarily going for the company with the fastest connection time.
Factors other than network performance, including quality of support and price will also be important. If you are considering shared hosting then the load on the shared hosting system will likely be a greater constraint on the performance of your site than network connection time.
If you represent a hosting company and would like to be included in the table, or if you are researching prospective hosting locations and would like more detailed performance information please mail us