$ 9.95 / year, Best Shared Hosting, Fast Server, 24/7 Professional Support, 99.9% uptime

We are pleased to offer the following affordable shared hosting plan from fullyhost.com. Don't worry about a thing when testing our service as we offer a full refund within 30 days of service to all new customers.


Disk space: 1 GB
Bandwidth: 100GB
Additional domains: UNLIMITED
FTP accounts: unlimited
MySQL database: unlimited
24/7 support
$ 5.95 for 6 months or $ 9.95 per year, use coupon 50% OFF (Newspaper)
Order link (multiple locations)


Disk space: 2 GB
Bandwidth: 100GB
Additional domains: UNLIMITED
FTP accounts: unlimited
MySQL database: unlimited
24/7 support
$ 7.95 for 6 months or $ 13.95 per year, use coupon 50% OFF (Newspaper)
Order link (multiple locations)

If you have any questions, contact us here

Is shared hosting safe for a new website? The | Proxies123.com

Ofc can go with shared, that is the true purpose of shared hosting. They are made for small / medium sites with normal daily bandwidth.

Just be sure to pick a decent one, don't pick an unreliable company just because they're $ 1 cheaper.

So until you get to the point of having tens of thousands of users per day, you don't need to consider a dedicated one. These are made for high traffic sites and large sites in general (and for example, like online movies, warez, etc.) cannot be held shared).

office365: shared mailbox and passwords

I have users who have a shared mailbox, which generally works fine for our purposes. However, they recently received files from an organization that are sent as links, not as attachments. Security in these is strict and requires the account to which the link was sent to log in with your Office365 account to access. Other credentials are not accepted. Obviously, this causes a problem, since shared mailboxes do not have passwords. Power dynamics make it impossible for them to require files to be attached rather than linked.

Is there a way to avoid this, apart from converting the shared mailbox to a standard licensed account (which causes other problems)?

apache – 421 Misdirected request on shared host

421 is returned when the browser tries to reuse the connection for another site. This is allowed under HTTP / 2 to save the cost of opening another connection since, in most cases, it is better to use fewer connections under HTTP / 2.

The browser should only reuse a connection that is assigned to the same IP address and where the certificate used covers both sites (which is the case of its three sites).

Despite these conditions, occasionally the browser will try to reuse a connection when it shouldn't. Apache's main case is if different SSL / TLS settings are configured for each vhost. Looking at ssllabs.com for each of its three domains, the settings look the same, making it difficult to see why Apache is returning this. You should contact your hosting provider and ask them to verify this.

In these cases, Firefox will see response 421, establish a new connection, and request the resource again. However, unlike a 301 or 302, it appears that this won't show up as a separate request in the developer tools.

The alternatives to solve this are:

  1. Have the hosting provider identify the cause and allow the connections to be reused.
  2. Use different certificates for each domain (so that the browser does not try to reuse the connection).
  3. Use a different IP address for the other domains, even if they are assigned to the same server (so that the browser does not try to reuse the connection).
  4. Stop using http / 2, which seems a shame as it generally provides good performance.
  5. Stop using other domains, at least for HTTP / 2.

I think you should seriously look at the last one. The benefit of using other domains (called sharding) is often overstated in my opinion for HTTP / 1 and shouldn't be necessary under HTTP / 2.

Fragmentation is done for two reasons:

  1. To allow 6 lower HTTP / 1.1 connections as browsers, the typical maximum is 6 simultaneous connections per domain. However, unless those seventh, eighth connections … etc. used a lot, the cost of setting them up may not be worth it. And under HTTP / 2, the limit is much higher (generally at least 100 simultaneous streams per connection).
  2. Domains without cookies to save in request sizes. But under HTTP / 2, the HTTP headers are compressed, so you're less concerned about this (and again, in my opinion, the value of this was overstated: how big cookies really are).

Looking at the web page test for your home page, you're loading the main page over the www domain, and then 6 assets over one static subdomain and 6 assets over the following subdomain and a few more on each:

Waterfall view

Here you can see the real cost of your 421s, as almost all connections need to be reestablished with one connection and SSL negotiation. Ignoring this for a moment, you can see that yes, you are downloading more than 6 resources at the same time in your two static subdomains. So if it is an HTTP / 1.1 connection, you would benefit from breaking the 6 connection limit for a moment. But you are also wasting the www connection which is down after the first request. This is made more obvious from the Connection View:

Connection view

So you can get rid of one of those subdomains and serve those assets for the www domain to get utilization of that first connection.

For HTTP / 2, you can also get rid of the other domain as it shouldn't be necessary. Then it can provide different results to HTTP / 2 and HTTP / 1.1 users, but that's tricky, all major browsers support HTTP / 2 and for 24 requests in total it won't even be a huge performance load going to a domain for those who don't.

In short, stop sharing domains without cookies unless you have a good reason to do so, as a quick glance at your homepage is not helping your performance anyway, and while you're addressing this issue 421, you it is hindering considerably.

Why are reseller offers so different from shared and vps?

Can anyone explain this phenomenon to me?

shared hosting: here is 100GB of space for $ 5 / month

VPS: Here's 30GB SSD for $ 6 / mo

Reseller: 1 … | Read the rest of https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1803831&goto=newpost

Detects and alerts remote management shared screen

I am trying to make a script to send an alert when the shared screen is activated.

The following command is supposed to list all established VNC connections, but this returns nothing to me:

netstat -a | grep vnc | grep ESTABLISHED 

the only option i found to list past connections:

 log show --predicate 'processImagePath CONTAINS "screensharingd" AND
 eventMessage CONTAINS "Authentication"'

Any ideas how to get the current VNC session? and even better, any ideas on how to send an alert / email in the background every time a new connection is made

PS: just to make sure, Apple Screen-Sharing (remotely managed) is using the VNC protocol right?

How to use my shared host directory with aws route 53 subdomain?

I have my web application hosted by a shared hosting provider (A2hosting). I need to link my web files on my shared hosting server to a subdomain on AWS Route 53. Can anyone advise me on this?

Print line input from a list of shared points

New to sharepoint and power platform settings and wanted some advice.
I have set up a simple payment request generator in powerapps and power automation where the data and its approval status are stored in a list of shared points.
What would be the best way to print the data for each line in a preformatted document? Would an html file be the easiest way or something else?

I am fairly new to the whole concept, so any help would be appreciated.

Thank you.

NeedyHosting | Shared | NO DMCA | BulletProof | FastFlux | VPS | GameServers | Dedicated |

This is our NEW thread. We have redesigned our entire website!

NeedyHosting Quick Links:

1. Home
2. Normal shared hosting
3. Bulletproof Housing
4. VPS Hosting
5. Game …

NeedyHosting | Shared | NO DMCA | BulletProof | FastFlux | VPS | GameServers | Dedicated |