[Neoon]

@perryoo11 Deployed, let me know if you have any further questions

[amanwaa]

At least I have a problem when registering! Always rejected! After I restarted Router and Change Browser
And it works!
I think you may not use a proxy when registering
Token: 627a996481113b1580cf2159a614cec44c70d8ae

Yes, I have same with me. please resolve as soon as possible.

[Neoon]

Yes, I have same with me. please resolve as soon as possible.

Well, you do not even fulfill the requirements.
Also these are Anti Fraud checks, if you come and register with a VPN, you get declined.
If you register with a vps provider, you also are required to turn off any VPN's.

---

State of ze Nano.

Just wanna publish a new update, regarding the new features + updates.

Features
Yesterday, I dropped a new update, which counts to the essential stuff, it was long overdue, so to speak.
Enables the user to VNC into his machine + select a ISO of his choice and change the boot order.



So, stuff like reinstall your OS can now be done anytime, by the user himself.
netboot.xyz.iso has been added also on all nodes, which contains a large section of OS's you can install anytime + the already existing iso's.

This also should, reduce the support requests, less work for me, nice.

Updates
As you may or may not know, the nodes are running Proxmox.
Currently still Proxmox 5.x with Debian 9.11.

The plan will be, to update these in the following months to Proxmox 6.x and Debian 10.
So far, no major API changes, everything works as expected, so there should not be a big downtime to be expected.

Upgrades will be announced, a few weeks in advance.

That's it for now.

[fChk]

Hello there!

I've applied for your VPS which will mainly be used to host my WebApps (LAMP stack), plus a Node.js monitoring service.

Token: 16a878aa7c1edfde60f9d3fcac8a094c3d1f4f4b

Thanks!

[Neoon]

Hello there!

I've applied for your VPS which will mainly be used to host my WebApps (LAMP stack), plus a Node.js monitoring service.

Token: 16a878aa7c1edfde60f9d3fcac8a094c3d1f4f4b

Thanks!

You you do not fulfill the requirements.
The account is to young.

[fChk]

You you do not fulfill the requirements.
The account is to young.

Well, let's see!

If we check my profile, the first thing to show up is:

Registration Date: 07-10-2018

That should make my account's age at least 17 months old. And if we check your requirements, it says:

The Requirements to get one
- Existing account since 4 months, here on post4vps
- Active account (you need to have a decent amount of recent posts)
- You need to have 50 posts before you apply
- Active usage of the KVM

So, are you sure that my account is really too young for your requirements?!!..

[Mashiro]

NanoKVM Nuremberg - NAT VPS Review

Hello Post4VPS Community and especially @Neoon

I'm going to use the chance and post my review and opinion about my current free NAT VPS provided by NanoKVM (@Neoon) and their respective sponsors.

When the NanoKVM thread was opened here I originally applied for a NanoKVM Canada NAT VPS and I got one. However the physical server that was used to host the Canada NAT VPSs was sponsored to NanoKVM for roughly 6 months and its sponsorship ended somewhere in November 2019 (CMIIW). @Neoon was so kind and offered a free replacement VPS in a different location (free as in without a need to reapply again to get one). I decided to request one and received a VPS located in Germany (Nuremberg, Bavaria).

Due to a lot of work in real life I unfortunately had no time to write a review for the service when I had the Canada NAT VPS.

I'll start with the review straight away.

---

VPS Specifications

Bellow you'll find a bit of information regarding the specifications of the free NAT VPS that I currently have. It's one of the smaller packages while nowadays you can get more resources if you can justify well enough. Look at the official NanoKVM site for all VPS plans and full resource overview (and all locations).

Specifications
CPU: Probably a Skylake based Xeon CPU (Family 15 Model 6 shown as Common KVM processor with 16 MB cache and 3.60 GHz frequency)
CPU Cores: 1
RAM: 512 MB
Disk Space: 10 GB SSD
Bandwidth: Unmetered (Fair Use)
Connection: 50 - 75 Mbps
IP Adresses(es): /80 IPv6 subnet and 20 dedicated IPv4 Ports on a shared IPv4 IP address through NAT
Location: Nuremberg, Bavaria, Germany (Hetzner)
Virtualization: KVM (Proxmox)
Control Panel: Custom NanoKVM panel using Proxmox API (support via e-mail)

Below are the specification details gathered through my bench.sh 2.0 benchmarking script:

Code: (Select All)

Processor       : Common KVM processor
CPU Cores       : 1 @ 3600 MHz
Memory          : 483 MB
Swap            : 511 MB
Uptime          : 21 days, 1:53,

OS              : Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster)
Arch            : x86_64 (64 Bit)
Kernel          : 4.19.0-6-amd64

Specifications are as advertised for my older and smaller package. Disk space information below:

Code: (Select All)

Filesystem                     Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
udev                           227M     0  227M   0% /dev
tmpfs                           49M  5.3M   44M  11% /run
/dev/mapper/Debian10--vg-root   11G  1.1G  9.0G  11% /
tmpfs                          242M     0  242M   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs                          5.0M     0  5.0M   0% /run/lock
tmpfs                          242M     0  242M   0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/sda1                      236M   49M  176M  22% /boot
tmpfs                           49M     0   49M   0% /run/user/0

So far everything checks out with the specifications advertised on the site and what I got. A nice little VPS that despite the resources can still be used for a lot of different things. You never had a really small VPS unless you experienced or owned a 32/64 MB RAM VPS with 2-5 GB of disk space .

---

VPS Usage

I have Debian 10 running on my NAT VPS and currently mainly use it for testing and development of my scripts and also as a web server for some of my domains serving non-public content (server to server connection, a normal visitor will see no website but just a web server response code "402" - greetings from Mr. Robot).

Once I have my Docker setup fully up and running on my other VPS I will do something different with the VPS. Not sure what exactly, yet. It will still serve a lot of testing. So at this point I don't have much to say. It's doing great for my usage purpose.

---

VPS Performance Benchmarks

Let's get to measuring the performance of the VPS with a few different benchmark solutions for CPU performance, disk speed and network speed performance.

CPU Performance

I used Byte Unixbench and Geekbench 5 to benchmark the performance of the VPS.

Byte Unixbench Result: 1322.4 points

Code: (Select All)

========================================================================
   BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 5.1.3)

   System: : GNU/Linux
   OS: GNU/Linux -- 4.19.0-6-amd64 -- #1 SMP Debian 4.19.67-2+deb10u2 (2019-11-11)
   Machine: x86_64 (unknown)
   Language: en_US.utf8 (charmap="UTF-8", collate="UTF-8")
   CPU 0: Common KVM processor (7200.0 bogomips)
          x86-64, MMX, Physical Address Ext, SYSENTER/SYSEXIT, SYSCALL/SYSRET
   18:15:07 up 21 days,  2:10,  1 user,  load average: 0.11, 0.05, 0.04; runlevel 5

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Run: Wed Jan 08 2020 18:15:07 - 18:42:58
1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests

Dhrystone 2 using register variables       60368836.1 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone                     8131.4 MWIPS (9.2 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput                               3490.2 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        668010.8 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks          177488.4 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks       2051425.6 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput                              917723.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching                 175743.4 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation                              14654.0 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   9905.8 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                   1309.9 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead                         561600.7 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)

System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   60368836.1   5173.0
Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       8131.4   1478.4
Execl Throughput                                 43.0       3490.2    811.7
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     668010.8   1686.9
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0     177488.4   1072.4
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0    2051425.6   3536.9
Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     917723.8    737.7
Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     175743.4    439.4
Process Creation                                126.0      14654.0   1163.0
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       9905.8   2336.3
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0       1309.9   2183.2
System Call Overhead                          15000.0     561600.7    374.4
                                                                   ========
System Benchmarks Index Score                                        1322.4

Geekbench Results: 1051 - 1057 points
Results: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/970273

To put this simple the single core I have is pretty much a beast. It outperformed by other VPS that has 4 cores. Yes, you read it right. The single core score of this VPS is higher than a quad multicore result of a Intel Xeon E5 CPU. You can feel it when using the VPS. Everything performs very snappy and tasks are done very quick. Nothing else to add here. Great performance thanks to the newer Skylake generation and high clock rates.

Oh, there is 0% steal inside my container. Therefore I conclude that the node is very well managed and there are no noisy containers or abusers.


SSD Performance

I used dd, hdparm and ioping to measure different SSD performance values and below are the results with a summary for the performance level at the end.

dd:

Code: (Select All)

I/O (1st run)   : 443 MB/s
I/O (2nd run)   : 482 MB/s
I/O (3rd run)   : 479 MB/s
Average I/O     : 468 MB/s or .46 GB/s

hdparm Speed Test (Cached):

Code: (Select All)

Timing cached reads:   31878 MB in  1.99 seconds = 16054.61 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 1396 MB in  3.00 seconds = 464.97 MB/sec

hdparm Speed Test (Direct):

Code: (Select All)

Timing O_DIRECT cached reads:   946 MB in  2.00 seconds = 472.88 MB/sec
Timing O_DIRECT disk reads: 1396 MB in  3.00 seconds = 465.14 MB/sec

ioping I/O Latency:

Code: (Select All)

4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=1 time=261.3 us (warmup)
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=2 time=289.8 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=3 time=214.0 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=4 time=250.6 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=5 time=233.0 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=6 time=304.9 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=7 time=199.2 us (fast)
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=8 time=293.8 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=9 time=248.5 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=10 time=340.3 us (slow)
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=11 time=275.1 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=12 time=338.9 us (slow)
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=13 time=317.8 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=14 time=289 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=15 time=300.0 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=16 time=258.9 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=17 time=205.9 us (fast)
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=18 time=244.5 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=19 time=245.5 us
4 KiB <<< . (ext4 /dev/dm-0): request=20 time=231.0 us

--- . (ext4 /dev/dm-0) ioping statistics ---
19 requests completed in 5.08 ms, 76 KiB read, 3.74 k iops, 14.6 MiB/s
generated 20 requests in 19.0 s, 80 KiB, 1 iops, 4.21 KiB/s
min/avg/max/mdev = 199.2 us / 267.4 us / 340.3 us / 41.5 us

ioping Disk Seek Rate:

Code: (Select All)

--- /dev/mapper/Debian10--vg-root (block device 10.3 GiB) ioping statistics ---
16.7 k requests completed in 2.93 s, 65.2 MiB read, 5.68 k iops, 22.2 MiB/s
generated 16.7 k requests in 3.00 s, 65.2 MiB, 5.56 k iops, 21.7 MiB/s
min/avg/max/mdev = 64.8 us / 176.0 us / 4.22 ms / 81.9 us

ioping Disk Sequential Speed:

Code: (Select All)

5.58 k requests completed in 2.96 s, 1.36 GiB read, 1.89 k iops, 471.3 MiB/s
generated 5.58 k requests in 3.00 s, 1.36 GiB, 1.86 k iops, 464.9 MiB/s
min/avg/max/mdev = 214.2 us / 530.4 us / 2.96 ms / 361.4 us

The SSD performs as expected: very well. I'm getting speeds of up to 470 MB/s (average) anytime I test it with dd and other benchmarking tools. The I/O latency is very low meaning that requests are performed quicker which is generally the advantaged of SSDs. The SSD is not overloaded or you could expect way worse latency times and slower speeds. This great speed and responsiveness contribues a lot to the snappy and smooth experience so far.


Network Performance

To test the advertised network performance and how much of it I would really get/be able to use I used wget (download big test files), the speedtest.net CLI client and iperf3. Results are below.

wget Speed Test IPv4:

Code: (Select All)

Location                Provider        Speed           Latency

Global
CDN                     Cachefly        7.17MB/s        5.238 ms

United States
Atlanta, GA, US         Coloat          6.69MB/s        110.799 ms
Dallas, TX, US          Softlayer       6.58MB/s        123.660 ms
Seattle, WA, US         Softlayer       6.50MB/s        145.771 ms
San Jose, CA, US        Softlayer       6.41MB/s        154.650 ms
Washington, DC, US      Leaseweb        6.89MB/s        103.713 ms

Asia
Tokyo, Japan            Linode          6.26MB/s        273.774 ms
Singapore               Softlayer       6.49MB/s        153.187 ms
Taiwan                  Hinet           6.31MB/s        212.797 ms

Europe
Rotterdam, Netherlands  id3.net         7.16MB/s        14.687 ms
Haarlem, Netherlands    Leaseweb        7.17MB/s        5.302 ms

wget Speed Test IPv6:

Code: (Select All)

Location                Provider        Speed           Latency

United States
Atlanta, GA, US         QuadraNET       6.09MB/s        102.340 ms
Dallas, TX, US          Linode          6.77MB/s        118.660 ms
Newark, NJ, US          Linode          6.54MB/s        81.441 ms
Fremont, CA, US         Linode          6.68MB/s        164.227 ms
Chicago, IL, US         Steadfast       6.69MB/s        103.641 ms

Asia
Tokyo, Japan            Linode          5.93MB/s        273.867 ms
Singapore               Linode          6.62MB/s        163.350 ms

Europe
Frankfurt, Germany      Linode          7.07MB/s        5.657 ms
London, UK              Linode          7.05MB/s        21.071 ms
Haarlem, Netherlands    Leaseweb        7.06MB/s        12.203 ms

Speedtest.net CLI:

Code: (Select All)

Speedtest by Ookla

     Server: Uganda Hosting Limited - Nuremberg (id = 20963)
        ISP: Hetzner Online GmbH
    Latency:     0.58 ms   (0.10 ms jitter)
   Download:    60.16 Mbps (data used: 28.6 MB)
     Upload:    61.87 Mbps (data used: 71.1 MB)
Packet Loss: Not available.

Result URL: https://www.speedtest.net/result/c/ddec5...15920c1564


iperf3 IPv4 Upload (Serverius, Amsterdam, NL):

Code: (Select All)

[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  81.6 MBytes  68.4 Mbits/sec  4468             sender
[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  74.3 MBytes  62.3 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf3 IPv6 Upload (Serverius, Amsterdam, NL):

Code: (Select All)

[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  80.8 MBytes  67.8 Mbits/sec  4323             sender
[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  73.8 MBytes  61.9 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf3 IPv4 Download (Serverius, Amsterdam, NL):

Code: (Select All)

[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  76.5 MBytes  64.1 Mbits/sec  199             sender
[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  71.7 MBytes  60.2 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf3 IPv6 Download (Serverius, Amsterdam, NL):

Code: (Select All)

[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  74.9 MBytes  62.8 Mbits/sec  156             sender
[SUM]   0.00-10.00  sec  70.7 MBytes  59.3 Mbits/sec                  receiver

The advertised speed is between 50 and 75 Mbps and so is the real speed. Overall you can say that both Upstream and Downstream settle at around 60 - 68 Mbps over IPv4 and IPv6. As can be seen in the wget speed tests the speed to various different locations is quite great and pretty stable (both IPv4 and IPv6) which indicates pretty good connectivity to outside locations (outside of Europe). I'm more than happy with these results.

RAW benchmark data: https://mega.nz/#!gQki3Q4I!Hvil0ZR17U_8N...J1AgSTRPl4

---

Summary

The NanoKVM DE NAT VPS that I received is a great small box with a beast CPU, a very speedy SSD and a great network. It offers enough performance for many projects and certainly for various testing. Despite the small amount of resources you can still run a lot of things on it if you know how to handle lowend boxes.

While many might see NAT as a issue I don't think so. 20 dedicated IPv4 ports are actually enough for a lot of you use something like HAProxy. Infact NanoKVM offers HAProxy in their control panel so you can host websites and other stuff on port 80/443 inside your NAT container with different domains! The /80 IPv6 subnet is great if you have IPv6 or you can use a IPv6 to IPv4 gateway (CloudFlare for example) to actually host web applications and similar over IPv6 only but allow access over both IPv4 and IPv6.

It's a great small dev box with great potential.

[Neoon]

@fChk Oh yea, was a mistake on my side, I accepted the request, its deployed.

@Hidden Refuge

Thanks for the Feedback.

I/O is capped at 500MB/sec and Network at 7.5MB/sec, theoretically it goes up to 1.4GB/sec on I/O and 125MB/sec on the network.
A lot of room, so if someone does compile stuff or run benches, it does not affect any other VM's on the node.

[fChk]

@fChk Oh yea, was a mistake on my side, I accepted the request, its deployed.

No problem!.. We all make mistakes :-)

Thanks for the NAT VPS. I'll set it up this week-end.

+1 Rep for the deployment.

[youssefbasha]

@'Hidden Refuge' Awesome review
@Neoon why you refused my request, i wanted the vps to test my new skills (web page).. i don't want it for my hosting :/