__/ [Allis] on Tuesday 14 February 2006 21:49 \__
> Knowing the little foolery that wise men have makes a great show, MGW
> has proclaimed :
>
>> On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 21:30:12 -0000, Allis <allis@allis> scrawled:
>>
>>> Knowing the little foolery that wise men have makes a great show, Roy
>>> Schestowitz has proclaimed :
>>>
>>> > Is it common for a Web host to permit and accommodate extra
>>> > bandwidth for an additional cost? I am aware that one's individual
>>> > host would be the best point-of-contact for such a question, but it
>>> > puts the client in an inconvenient situation. The host has an
>>> > financial incentives having clients turn to dedicated hosting, I'm
>>> > guessing. Will exceptional (beyond advertised plans) shared hosting
>>> > be acceptable? I know that extra storage space can be paid for
>>> > annually, but when is the client forced to migrate...
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for any insights,
>>> >
>>> > Roy
>>> >
>>>
>>> Depends on the Hosts policy.
>>> Some allow overages and notify, some simply set to autosuspend when
>>> the plan totals out.
>>> Most all hosts should allow the user to go over with allowances made
>>> for payment of same though.
I imagine that they must draw the line somewhere, or else Webmasters will
never be inclined to buy a server.
>> What is your company's policy?
I don't know and asking such a question could put me in a trap. I wanted to
know what was acceptable in industry so that, if necessary, I could
negotiate with arguments to back me. I already pay extras for storage, but
where will this end?
> I don't call it The Moose is Loose for nothing ;)
>
> Our system auto notifies when the user gets to 80%.
> Resellers are in control of their own domains.
> Typically, here, if there's no response from users getting close to being
> in trouble, my Support Team jumps in and usually overrides.
I think that's rather severe. Hosts that boast 99.[9]+ uptime should not
disconnect in haste. It can be damaging to both the Webmaster and the host's
reputation.
Roy
|
|
