creating my own server

[kujoe2002]

So, I'm seriously pondering the idea of hosting my own server for my websites and maybe a VoIP. My current host - hostmonster has been going through some serious issues the last year. This is the hardware I am thinking of using - its my old computer:

CASE: Rosewill Thor Full ATX
MOBO: MSI LGA 775 P43C51
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 LGA 775 @ 2.83GhZ
RAM: 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 1333 Corsair XMS3
CPU FAN: Coolmaster Hyper 212
HDD: 200GB WD SATA
VIDEO: eVGA GTX 260 x16
PSU: OCZ Fatal1ty 550W

Is there anything else I would need in terms of hardware? Also should I be installing windows or linux for this server? The sites I am looking to host are using e107, wordpress and roundcube email. There are only 6 sites I would be hosting.

[Steve R Jones]

Odds are that your ISP will catch wind due to all of the traffic and want you to get a Commercial Account.

[James]

Basically the next question is whether or not you plan to colocate your server. If you do, it's cheaper to buy a new 1U to save on rack space costs (charge per U per month) and power costs.

If you are running from home, the only worry is yes, your ISP catching wind and shutting you down.

Other than that, I would suggest RAID1 plus either a cold or hot spare. Even if it's just "a couple of websites" if you lose them, you'll wish you had spent another $40 on a spare hard drive.

[Steven P Jobs]

Unless you get a lot of enjoyment out of the tinkering aspect, it's better to just pay someone else to do your hosting.

[PDR60]

I haven't been to Sharky in a looonnng time. Thought I'd stop by and see whats cookin. I've had a large number of requests for resurrecting my old site that used to have complete walk-throughs on building securing and running a LAMP server and other cool stuff. It was called LinuxLoader.com. I started it way back in the hay day and shut it down about a year ago because my PIII system finally gave up the ghost. All the stuff everyone says about maintenance and daily care and feeding is not any more than patching your workstation. One thing you'll absolutely have to have is a commercial line. I've had one for years, and now with netflix and all the online media, a true commercial line is a great way to enjoy the Internet. Then if you also want to put up a mail server or other net services, there is no hiding or trying to work around your provider. One other benefit is that, as a commercial account, you get fixed first in an outage and you are at the top of the pecking order for service. Many times you have your own account rep. I'll be the first to admit that ISP's are not the best at servicing anyone, but a commercial account moves you to the top of the heap. You'll also have the benefit of a full open line. No firewall between you and the Internet. There's good and bad to that but it's not too hard to secure things.

[vertices]

I don't know I guess it depends on where you live and what's available. I used to have a commercial account for all the reasons stated by PDR60, static IP, service, etc. But I got tired of paying more money for less speed. I also find that you really don't even need a static IP address for much anymore, I can even maintain static VPN tunnels to several other sites with ease on a dynamic IP.

In my area there is no bandwidth caps on residential service. I couldn't bundle, and had to pay quite a bit more on the commercial side. Now I have a cheap 60x5 line. Having a good firewall is the most important to get the most out of your ISP. I dropped a grand on mine for proper ACLs, bandwidth prioritization, UTM, VPN, etc.

I see no reason to run any kind of server in your house anymore that requires inbound access that would be blocked by your ISP. I'd rather put the money I save by going with residential service and less power used towards a cheap hosted VPS if I really wanted to dork around with web and SMTP type stuff. For other types of servers you can always VPN into your house, or just allow access, either way.

I just think there are much better ways of going about this other than running and powering your own iron for web or VoIP. I do run a server a couple of "servers" at home, but just a ReadyNAS and a new media server box I built for Plex Media Server but that's about it. Everything else I run is in a Colo.

[kujoe2002]

I don't know I guess it depends on where you live and what's available. I used to have a commercial account for all the reasons stated by PDR60, static IP, service, etc. But I got tired of paying more money for less speed. I also find that you really don't even need a static IP address for much anymore, I can even maintain static VPN tunnels to several other sites with ease on a dynamic IP.

In my area there is no bandwidth caps on residential service. I couldn't bundle, and had to pay quite a bit more on the commercial side. Now I have a cheap 60x5 line. Having a good firewall is the most important to get the most out of your ISP. I dropped a grand on mine for proper ACLs, bandwidth prioritization, UTM, VPN, etc.

I see no reason to run any kind of server in your house anymore that requires inbound access that would be blocked by your ISP. I'd rather put the money I save by going with residential service and less power used towards a cheap hosted VPS if I really wanted to dork around with web and SMTP type stuff. For other types of servers you can always VPN into your house, or just allow access, either way.

I just think there are much better ways of going about this other than running and powering your own iron for web or VoIP. I do run a server a couple of "servers" at home, but just a ReadyNAS and a new media server box I built for Plex Media Server but that's about it. Everything else I run is in a Colo.

Who are you hosted with? I know Hostmonster and Blue host are the same people. I've read that Hostgator may be as well.

[vertices]

I have my own rack and vSphere deployment in a Colo with a SAN and 300GB of RAM and 63Ghz of CPU as my company hosts servers for local businesses. So I just put stuff like my kids Ubuntu Minecraft server on that. I don't have a VPS with one of the common hosts but if I didn't have what I have, I would. If it were me, I’d probably just grab one from GoDaddy, but you can definitely find cheaper ones out there.
http://www.godaddy.com/hosting/vps-hosting.aspx

[rimmerchant]

If you calculate the cost of you running the servers/cost of server/cost of dedicated line/ time to maintain server etc. etc..

It may be cheaper to just have someone else host your websites.

the webserver I use is like $5 a month and I think it's pretty cheap to add more domains/other websites.

there are alot of cheap web host out there. and even some server hosting.

[James]

Cheap doesn't mean good.

Patrick over at servethehome.com has been cataloging his move from hosting, to VPS, to amazon EC2, back to colocation of his own systems as his site has grown. Colocating his own servers will save him a boatload of cash over the previous options.

[PDR60]

Lots of FUD here concerning this subject. I cut my teeth on hosting and running an isp in the late 90's. Most folks on this site are power users and have more than one machine. Considering how much actual overhead is involved in running your own server, the cost is actually pretty low. You will need a commercial line. That cost is fixed at about $79 per month. The advantage of this, you're running a commercial line. They are unmonitored for content and you're on your own for net security. Speed is very good and you're free to run just about anything thats legal. As far as a box goes, anything past a P2 will get the job done for a new site. If you get more traffic you'll of course upgrade. I ran my site on a dual P3 for years, until a lightening strike whacked it and most of my lab. It had over 2million hits when it took the damage. One great thing about running your own site is the security side. You can lock it down much tighter than many of the hosting services. A small wordpress or other package is pretty easy to load and a good way to get the hang of things.

So yes, its cheaper to pay a hosting service, and probably a bit more convenient. On the other hand, whats you're best bet is a matter of personal preference and how much you are dedicated to it. Its great for some and not for others. If you're considering it and get in over your head you can always revert to the hosting site scheme. Personally I have always hosted my own and its been a great enjoyment and a great learning tool as well as enhanced my career.

[vertices]

Lots of FUD here concerning this subject. I cut my teeth on hosting and running an isp in the late 90's. Most folks on this site are power users and have more than one machine. Considering how much actual overhead is involved in running your own server, the cost is actually pretty low. You will need a commercial line. That cost is fixed at about $79 per month. The advantage of this, you're running a commercial line. They are unmonitored for content and you're on your own for net security. Speed is very good and you're free to run just about anything thats legal. As far as a box goes, anything past a P2 will get the job done for a new site. If you get more traffic you'll of course upgrade. I ran my site on a dual P3 for years, until a lightening strike whacked it and most of my lab. It had over 2million hits when it took the damage. One great thing about running your own site is the security side. You can lock it down much tighter than many of the hosting services. A small wordpress or other package is pretty easy to load and a good way to get the hang of things.

So yes, its cheaper to pay a hosting service, and probably a bit more convenient. On the other hand, whats you're best bet is a matter of personal preference and how much you are dedicated to it. Its great for some and not for others. If you're considering it and get in over your head you can always revert to the hosting site scheme. Personally I have always hosted my own and its been a great enjoyment and a great learning tool as well as enhanced my career.

I don't know that I would label the information in this thread as FUD. Your statement regarding commercial lines may be true where you live, but it is not where I live. You pay more, for significantly less speed and lose the ability to bundle. That would be dependent on the policies of the ISPs in your area.

I think the cost of powering an old inefficient box 24/7, not to mention the added power used from your home AC due to extra heat generated by the old box should not be underestimated.

These are things to consider, not FUD. You can learn just as much with a VPS.

[Timman_24]

I guess I'll weigh in a bit. I'm sure I don't have as much experience as most of the other posters, but I have a site running using a EC2 and S3. I also have an internal test server and a separate storage server. I think most of what has been said is just conjecture since we do not know what server load you will be under. You mention 6 websites, but are they dynamic? Are they expected to get 1K, 10K, 1M hits per month? Pretty much any computer from the last 6 years can run a LAMP stack and be great for low end hosting. So, its hard to give any kind of recommendation without knowing what you projected load is going to be.

FWIW, a micro instance (2 cores) on EC2 costs a flat $15 per month, which is plenty for most websites. The good part about EC2 is you can instantly scale your website on demand instead of having to add more processing power by hand. S3 is free content storage for most websites due to the light load. If one of those websites is static then do yourself a favor and host it on S3 for free.

You will need to contact Amazon to get a mail server running. I have a newsletter mailing system on the server and they contacted me to make sure I wasn't a spammer.