What is Managed hosting service or dedicated server

A dedicated hosting service, dedicated server, or managed hosting service is a type of Internet hosting in which the client leases an entire server not shared with anyone. This is more flexible than shared hosting, as organizations have full control over the server(s), including choice of operating system, hardware, etc. Server administration can usually be provided by the hosting company as an add-on service. In some cases a dedicated server can offer less overhead and a larger return on investment.

Dedicated servers are most often housed in data centers, similar to colocation facilities, providing redundant power sources and HVAC systems. In contrast to colocation, the server hardware is owned by the provider and in some cases they will provide support for your operating system or applications. Here is the spesific describe:

1 Operating system support
2 Bandwidth and connectivity
3 Management
4 Security
5 Software
6 Limitations

Operating system support

Availability, price and employee familiarity often determines which operating systems are offered on dedicated servers. Variations of Linux and Unix (open source operating systems) are often included at no charge to the customer. Commercial operating systems include Microsoft Windows Server, provided through a special program called Microsoft SPLA. Red Hat Enterprise is a commercial version of Linux offered to hosting providers on a monthly fee basis. The monthly fee provides OS updates through the Red Hat Network using an application called yum. Other operating systems are available from the open source community at no charge. These include CentOS, Fedora Core, Debian, and many other Linux distributions or BSD systems FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD.

Support for any of these operating systems typically depends on the level of management offered with a particular dedicated server plan. Operating system support may include updates to the core system in order to acquire the latest security fixes, patches, and system-wide vulnerability resolutions. Updates to core operating systems include kernel upgrades, service packs, application updates, and security patches that keep server secure and safe. Operating system updates and support relieves the burden of server management from the dedicated server owner.

Bandwidth and connectivity

Bandwidth refers to the data transfer rate or the amount of data that can be carried from one point to another in a given time period (usually a second) and is often represented in bits (of data) per second (bit/s). For example, visitors to your server, web site, or applications utilize bandwidth as the traffic moves from your server to the Internet and vice versa. Connectivity refers to the “access providers” that supply bandwidth, or data transfer rate, through various connection points across a network or footprint to one or multiple data centers where dedicated servers are housed.

Bandwidth measurements are defined (per telecom standards) as the following:

1. First – 95th (measured using average bits and speed of transfer)
2. Second – Unmetered (measured in speed or bits)
3. Third – Total Transfer (measured in bytes transferred)

95th Method: line speed, billed on the 95th percentile, average or peak usage, refers to the speed in which data flows from the server or device. Line speed is measured in bits per second (or kilobits per second, megabits per second or gigabits per second).

Unmetered Method: The second bandwidth measurement is unmetered service where providers cap or control the “top line” speed for a server. Top line speed in unmetered bandwidth is the total Mbit/s allocated to the server and configured on the switch level. For example, if you purchase 10 Mbit/s unmetered bandwidth, the top line speed would be 10 Mbit/s. 10 Mbit/s would result in the provider controlling the speed transfers take place while providing the ability for the dedicated server owner to not be charged with bandwidth overages. Unmetered bandwidth services usually incur an additional charge.

Total Transfer Method: Some providers will calculate the Total Transfer, the measurement of actual data leaving and arriving, measured in bytes. Measurement between providers varies, though it is either the total traffic in, the total traffic out, whichever is the greater or the sum of the two.

One of the reasons for choosing to outsource dedicated servers is the availability of high powered networks from multiple providers. As dedicated server providers utilize massive amounts of bandwidth, they are able to secure lower volume based pricing to include a multi-provider blend of bandwidth. To achieve the same type of network without a multi-provider blend of bandwidth, a large investment in core routers, long term contracts, and expensive monthly bills would need to be in place. The expenses needed to develop a network without a multi-provider blend of bandwidth does not make sense economically for hosting providers.

Many dedicated server providers include a service level agreement based on network uptime. Some dedicated server hosting providers offer a 100% uptime guarantee on their network. By securing multiple vendors for connectivity and using redundant hardware, providers are able to guarantee higher uptimes; usually between 99-100% uptime if they are a higher quality provider. One aspect of higher quality providers is they are most likely to be multi-homed across multiple quality uplink providers, which in turn, provides significant redundancy in the event one goes down in addition to potentially improved routes to destinations.

Bandwidth consumption over the last several years has shifted from a per megabit usage model to a per gigabyte usage model. Bandwidth was traditionally measured in line speed access that included the ability to purchase needed megabits at a given monthly cost. As the shared hosting model developed, the trend towards gigabyte or total bytes transferred, replaced the megabit line speed model so dedicated server providers started offering per gigabyte.

Prominent players in the dedicated server market offer large amounts of bandwidth ranging from 500 gigabytes to 3000 gigabytes using the “overselling” model. It is not uncommon for major players to provide dedicated servers with 1Terabyte (TB) of bandwidth or higher. Usage models based on the byte level measurement usually include a given amount of bandwidth with each server and a price per gigabyte after a certain threshold has been reached. Expect to pay additional fees for bandwidth overage usage. For example, if a dedicated server has been given 3000 gigabytes of bandwidth per month and the customer uses 5000 gigabytes of bandwidth within the billing period, the additional 2000 gigabytes of bandwidth will be invoiced as bandwidth overage. Each provider has a different model for billing. As of yet, no industry standards have been set.

Management

To date, no industry standards have been set to clearly define the management role of dedicated server providers. What this means is that each provider will use industry standard terms, but each provider will define them differently. For some dedicated server providers, fully managed is defined as having a web based control panel while other providers define it as having dedicated system engineers readily available to handle all server and network related functions of the dedicated server provider.

Server management can include some or all of the following:

• Operating system updates
• Application updates
• Server monitoring
• SNMP hardware monitoring
• Application monitoring
• Application management
• Technical support
• Firewall services
• Antivirus updates
• Security audits
• DDoS protection and mitigation
• Intrusion detection
• Backups and restoration
• Disaster recovery
• DNS hosting service
• Load balancing
• Database administration
• Performance tuning
• Software installation and configuration
• User management
• Programming consultation

Dedicated hosting server providers define their level of management based on the services they provide. In comparison, fully managed could equal self managed from provider to provider.

Administrative maintenance of the operating system, often including upgrades, security patches, and sometimes even daemon updates are included. Differing levels of management may include adding users, domains, daemon configuration, or even custom programming.

Dedicated server hosting providers may provide the following types of server managed support:

1. Fully Managed - Includes monitoring, software updates, reboots, security patches and operating system upgrades. Customers are completely hands-off
2. Managed - Includes medium level of management, monitoring, updates, and a limited amount of support. Customers may perform specific tasks.
3. Self Managed - Includes regular monitoring and some maintenance. Customers provide most operations and tasks on dedicated server.
4. Unmanaged - Little to no involvement from service provider. Customers provide all maintenance, upgrades, patches, and security.

Note: The provider will continue to maintain security on the network regardless of support level.

Security

Dedicated hosting server providers utilize extreme security measures to ensure the safety of data stored on their network of servers. Providers will often deploy various software programs for scanning systems and networks for obtrusive invaders, spammers, hackers, and other harmful problems such as Trojans, worms, eggdrops and crashers (Sending multiple connections). Linux and Windows use different software for security protection.

Software

Providers often bill for dedicated servers on a fixed monthly price to include specific software packages. Over the years, software vendors realized the significant market opportunity to bundle their software with dedicated servers. They have since started introducing pricing models that allow dedicated hosting providers the ability to purchase and resell software based on reduced monthly fees.

Microsoft offers software licenses through a program called the Service Provider License Agreement. The SPLA model provides use of Microsoft products through a monthly user or processor based fee. SPLA software includes the Windows Operating System, Microsoft SQL Server, Microsoft Exchange Server, Microsoft SharePoint and shoutcast hosting, and many other server based products.

Dedicated Server Providers usually offer the ability to select the software you want installed on a dedicated server. Depending on the overall usage of the server, this will include your choice of operating system, database, and specific applications. Servers can be customized and tailored specific to the customer’s needs and requirements.

Other software applications available are specialized web hosting specific programs called control panels. Control panel software is an all inclusive set of software applications, server applications, and automation tools that can be installed on a dedicated server. Control panels include integration into web servers, database applications, programming languages, application deployment, server administration tasks, and include the ability to automate tasks via a web based front end.

Most dedicated servers are packaged with a control panel. Control panels are often confused with management tools, but these control panels are actually web based automation tools created to help automate the process of web site creation and server management. Control panels should not be confused with a full server management solution by a dedicated hosting provider.

Limitations

Many providers do not allow IRC (bots, clients or daemons). This is due to rogue IRC users triggering DDoS attacks against the provider, which may overwhelm their networks, lowering service quality for all customers.

1. Adult content is disallowed by many providers as it may either be of questionable legality or consume large amounts of bandwidth.
2. Copyright violation Hosting copyrighted material of which you do not own the copyright to is against the terms of service of most hosting companies.

Chose your own hosting and domain which is the most handy when you are get a webs on your hand. Bya this article you can understand what is the most suitable for your condition.

Continue Reading

Factoring Terminology On Structured settlement factoring transaction

Best Interest Standard On Factoring Terminology On Structured settlement factoring transaction. Internal Revenue Code Sec. 5891 and most state laws require that a court find that a proposed settlement factoring transaction be in the best interest of the seller, taking into account the welfare and support of any dependents. “Best interest” is generally not defined, which gives judges flexibility to make a subjective determination on a case-by-case basis. Some state laws may require that the judge look at factors such as the “purpose of the intended use of the funds,” the payee’s mental and physical capacity, and the seller’s potential need for future medical treatment. One Minnesota court described the “best interest standard” as a determination involving “a global consideration of the facts, circumstances, and means of support available to the payee and his or her dependents.”

Courts have consistently found that the “best interest standard” is not limited to financial hardship cases. Hence, a transfer may be in a seller’s best interest because it allows him to take advantage of an opportunity (i.e., buy a new home, start a business, attend college, etc.) or to avoid disaster (i.e., pay for a family member’s unexpected medical care, pay off mounting debt, etc.). For example, a New Jersey court found that a transaction was in a seller’s best interest where the funds were used to “pay off bills…and to buy a home and get married.”

Although sometimes criticized for being vague, the best interest standard’s lack of precise definition allows considerable latitude in judicial review. Courts can consider on a case-by-case basis the totality of the circumstances surrounding the transfer to determine whether it should be approved.

Discount Rate

In the beginning, the factoring industry had some relatively high discount rates due to heavy expenses caused by costly litigation battles and limited access to traditional investors. However, once state and federal legislation was enacted, the industry’s interest rates decreased dramatically. There is much confusion with the terminology “discount rate” because the term is used in different ways. The discount rate referred to in a factoring transaction is similar to an interest rate associated with home loans, credit cards and car loans where the interest rate is applied to the payment stream itself. In a factoring transaction, the factoring company knows the payment stream they are going to purchase and applies an interest rate to the payment stream itself and solves for the funding amount, as though it was a loan. Discount rates from factoring companies to consumers can range anywhere between 8% up to over 18% but usually average somewhere in the middle (link to a discount rate calculator can be found here).

Factoring discount rates can be a bit higher when compared to home loan interest rates, due to the fact the factoring transactions are more of a boutique product for investors opposed to the mainstream collateralized mortgage transactions. One common mistake in calculating the discount rate is to use “elementary school math” where you take the funding/loan amount and divide it by the total price of all the payments being purchased. Because this method disregards the concept of time (and the time value of money), the resulting percentage is useless. For example, the court in In Re Henderson Receivables Origination v.

Campos noted an annual discount rate of 16.8% where the annuitant received $36,500 for the assignment of payments totaling $63,364.94 over 84 months (two monthly payments of $672.32 each, beginning September 30, 2006 and ending on October 31, 2006; eighty-two monthly payments of $692.49 each, increasing 3% every twelve months, beginning on November 30, 2006 and ending on August 31, 2013). However, had the court in Henderson Receivables Origination applied the illogical formula of discounting from “elementary school math” ($36,500/ $63,364.94), the discount rate would have been an astronomical (and nonsensical) 61%.

Discounted Present Value

Another term commonly used in factoring transactions is “discounted present value,” which is defined in the NCOIL model transfer act as “the present value of future payments determined by discounting such payments to the present using the most recently published Applicable Federal Rate for determining the present value of an annuity, as issued by the United States Internal Revenue Service.” The IRS discount rate, also known as the Applicable Federal Rate (AFR), is used to determine the charitable deduction for many types of planned gifts, such as charitable remainder trusts and gift annuities. The rate is the annual rate of return that the IRS assumes the gift assets will earn during the gift term. The IRS discount rate is published monthly (link to current rate may be found here).

In Henderson Receivables Origination (above), the court calculated the discounted present value of the $63,364.94 to be transferred as $50,933.18 based on the applicable federal rate of 6.00%. The “discounted present value” is a measuring stick for determining what the value of a future payment (i.e., a payment that is due in the year 2057) is today. Hence, the discounted present value of a payment corrects for inflation and the principle that money available today is worth more than money not accessible for 50 years (or some future time). However, the discounted present value is not the same thing as market value (what someone is willing to pay).

Basically, a calculation that discounts a future payment based on IRS rates is an artificial number since it has no bearing on the payment’s actual selling price. For example, in Henderson Receivables Origination, it is somewhat confusing for the court to evaluate future payments totaling $63,364,94 based the discounted present value of $50,933.18 because that is not the market value of the payments.

In other words, the annuitant couldn’t go out and get $50,933.18 for his future payments because no person or company would be willing to pay that much. Some states will require a quotient to be listed on the disclosure that is sent to the customer prior to entering into a contract with a factoring company. The quotient is calculated by dividing the purchase price by the discounted present value. The quotient (like the discounted present value) provides no relevance in the pricing of a settlement factoring transaction. In Henderson Receivables Origination (above), the court did consider this quotient which was calculated as 71.70% ($36,500/ $50,933.18).

Continue Reading

Process Structured settlement factoring Pre-2002

Congress enacted law to provide special tax breaks for payments received by tort victims in structured settlements, and for the companies that funded them. The payments were tax free, whereas if the tort victim had been given a lump sum and invested it themselves, the payments from those investments would be taxable.

Companies liked structured settlements because it allowed them to avoid taxes to a certain extent, and plaintiffs liked them because it allowed them to receive tax-free payments of what became, over time, a much larger amount of money than the original amount paid out by the settling party. Such settlements were also considered an especially good idea for minors, as they held the money safe for adulthood and ensured that youth would not find the money wasted or ill-spent. “Despite the best intentions of plaintiffs, lump sum settlement awards are often quickly dissipated because of excessive spending, poor financial management, or a combination of both. Statistics showed that twenty-five to thirty percent of all cash awards are exhausted within two months, and ninety percent are exhausted within five years.” Andrada, “Structured Settlements – The Assignability Problem,” 9 S. Cal. Interdis. L.J. 465, 468 (Spring 2000).

An explanation of IRS Code section 130 was given during discussions of possible taxation of companies that bought future payments under those structured settlements. “By enacting the PPSA, Congress expressed its support of structured settlements, and sought to shield victims and their families from pressures to prematurely dissipate their recoveries.” 145 Cong. Rec. S52281-01 (daily ed. May 13, 1999) (statement of Sen. Chaffee).

Congress was willing to afford such tax advantages based on the belief that the loss in income taxes would be more than made up by lower expenditures on public assistance programs for those who suffered significant injuries. A strict requirement for a structured settlement to qualify for this tax break was that the tort victim was barred from accessing their periodic payments before they came due. It was for this reason that the annuity had to be owned by another who had control over it. The tort victim could not be seen to have “constructive receipt” of the annuity funds prior to their periodic payments. If the tort victim could cash in the annuity at any time, it was possible that the IRS might find constructive receipt.

“Congress conditioned the favorable rules on a requirement that the periodic payments cannot be accelerated, deferred, increased or decreased by the injured person. Both the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committee Reports stated that the periodic payments as personal injury damages are still excludable fro income only if the recipient is not in constructive receipt of or does not have the current economic benefit of the sum required to produce the periodic payments.”

Testimony of Tax Legislative Counsel Joseph M. Mikrut to the Subcommittee on Oversight of the Committee of Ways and Means, March 18, 1999. “These factoring transactions directly undermine the policy objective underlying the structured settlement tax regime, that of protecting the long term financial needs of injuries persons . . . “ (Id.)

Mr. Mikrut was testifying in favor of imposing a punitive tax on factoring companies that engaged in pursuit of structured settlement payments. Despite the use of non-assignment clauses in annuity contracts to secure the tax advantages for tort victims. companies cropped up that tried to advantage of these individuals in ”factoring” transactions, purchasing their periodic payments in return for a deeply discounted lump sump payment. Congress felt that factoring company purchases of structured settlement payments “so directly subvert the Congressional policy underlying structured settlements and raise such serious concerns for the injured victims,” that bills were proposed in both the Senate and the House to penalize companies which engage in such transactions. (Id.)

Before the enactment of IRC 5891, which became effective on July 1, 2002, some states regulated the transfer of structured settlement payment rights, while others did not. Most states that regulated transfers at this time followed a general pattern, substantially similar to the present day process which is mandated in IRC 5891 (see below for more details of the post-2002 process). However, the majority of the transfers processed from 1988 to 2002 were not court ordered.[9] After negotiating the terms of the transaction (including the payments to be sold and the price to be paid for those payments), a formal purchase contract was executed, effecting an assignment of the subject payments upon closing. Part of this assignment process also included the grant of a security interest in the structured settlement payments, to secure performance of the seller’s obligations. Filing a public lien based on that security agreement created notice of this assignment and interest. The insurance company issuing the structured settlement annuity checks was typically not given actual notice of the transfer, due to antagonism by the insurance industry against factoring and transfer companies. Many annuity issuers were concerned that factoring transactions, which were not contemplated when Congress enacted IRC 130, might upset the tax treatment of qualified assignments. HR 2884 (discussed below) resolved this question for annuity issuers.

Continue Reading

Structured settlement factoring transaction

A structured settlement factoring transaction describes the selling of future structured settlement payments (or, more accurately, rights to receive the future structured settlement payments). People who receive structured settlement payments (for example, the payment of personal injury damages over time instead of in a lump sum at settlement) may decide at some point that they need more money in the short term than the periodic payment provides over time. People's reasons are varied but can include unforeseen medical expenses for oneself or a dependent, the need for improved housing or transportation, education expenses and the like. To meet this need, the structured settlement recipient can sell (or, less commonly, encumber) all or part of their future periodic payments for a present lump sum.

HISTORY Structured settlement factoring transaction

Structured settlements experienced an explosion in use beginning in the 1980s.The growth is most likely attributable to the favorable federal income tax treatment such settlements receive as a result of the 1982 amendment of the tax code to add § 130. Internal Revenue Code § 130 provides, inter alia, substantial tax incentives to insurance companies that establish “qualified” structured settlements.There are other advantages for the original tort defendant (or casualty insurer) in settling for payments over time, in that they benefit from the time value of money (most demonstrable in the fact that an annuity can be purchased to fund the payment of future periodic payments, and the cost of such annuity is far less than the sum total of all payments to be made over time). Finally, the tort plaintiff also benefits in several ways from a structured settlement, notably in the ability to receive the periodic payments from an annuity that gains investment value over the life of the payments, and the settling plaintiff receives the total payments, including that “inside build-up” value, tax-free.

However, a substantial downside to structured settlements comes from their inherent inflexibility. To take advantage of the tax benefits allotted to defendants who choose to settle cases using structured settlements, the periodic payments must be set up to meet basic requirements [set forth in IRC 130(c)]. Among other things, the payments must be fixed and determinable, and cannot be accelerated, deferred, increased or decreased by the recipient. For many structured settlement recipients, the periodic payment stream is their only asset. Therefore, over time and as recipients’ personal situations change in ways unpredicted at the settlement table, demand for liquidity options rises. To offset the liquidity issue, most structured settlement recipients, as a part of their total settlement, will receive an immediate sum to be invested to meet the needs not best addressed through the use of a structured settlement. Beginning in the late 1980s, a few small financial institutions started to meet this demand and offer new flexibility for structured settlement payees. In April 2009, financial writer Suze Orman wrote in a syndicated column [1] that selling future structured settlement payments "is tempting but it's typically not smart."

Continue Reading

Purchase Structured Settlements

Companies that purchase structured settlements will buy out your future payments in exchange for advancing you money now, minus their fee. These companies can provide needed cash in a lump sum, far more than your monthly allotment, if that is what you choose to do, instead of staying on the monthly or yearly plan that your structured settlement sets forth.

If you have been involved in a lawsuit for personal injury, product defects, medical malpractice, or wrongful death of a family member, you may have mediated a settlement offer. Many times, since settlements in personal injury cases can be so large, the payouts are structured, or set up to be paid out in increments over time. This can be over several months, or years, and in some cases for a lifetime of payments. This amounts to a guaranteed income for the person who has settled their lawsuit for monetary compensation.

HOW TO Purchase Structured Settlements

When a large sum is spread out over many months, or years, there can be some tax advantages, and it does assure the recipient of future income. By taking a large lump sum all at once, the person who receives it gets a large amount of money all at one time, with nothing set aside for future expenses. People who are hurt and have ongoing medical expenses will need a lot of money for their future care, and a structured settlement is good for that purpose.

 

Purchase Structured Settlements Sometimes, however, the recipient has a good reason for wanting a large amount of cash immediately, instead of the smaller amounts over time. They might want to go to college, or buy a house, or have another good reason for needing some, or all, of their settlement money up front. This is a good time to consult the companies who purchase structured settlements.

There is a fee charged, from around 10 to 30 percent of the money advanced, and the transaction is similar to getting a payday advance, except for a lot more money, and the repayments go directly to the company that bought out your settlement. It is possible to have them purchase just a part of your settlement, so you get a lump sum now, and whatever remains would continue as before, but in a lesser amount. You would still get some future income, just not as much.

When deciding to sell a settlement, it may be necessary to obtain court approval. That is one way that the legal system acts on your behalf, to be sure you are doing this for a good reason, because the structured payment system was decided upon for a good reason also. Take time to examine several companies who purchase structured settlements before you take action. Oftentimes, smaller competitors offer better rates and terms than the big names like Peachtree and JG Wentworth.

Continue Reading

What is a Structured Settlement Payment?

An agreement to receive future periodic payments for the dispersement of money stemming from a legal claim or other claim.

The present era is showing some problems that are acute and having a social aspect of ‘security of people, especially elderly’. This is one aspect which is making many of sleepless. Although one shouldn’t feel helpless. With the arrival of innumerable of Insurance companies this problem could be approached with proper planning.
The best option is the 'Structured Settlement Payments'. To avail this one needs to have one Structured Settlement Broker. This is important just to make the calculations and the projections for the receiving party to enable him to get the best output.

What is a Structured Settlement Payment?

Structured insurance settlement is one option that always has some benefits in this regard.
There are many cases when money usually gets distributed through one annuity purchase from any Life Insurance Company. The payments come in a regular basis where the time interval is one of supreme importance. It varies from annually to semi-annually to quarterly or even monthly. The time frame for the acceptance of payment, as well, gets varied. It spreads from a fixed period of time to lifetime. Even, there are cases when the payment is made on immediate basis. This is to cover the emergency of the claimant.
One very common instance may be that of car accident settlement. The payment always goes to the claimant immediately as soon the news conveyed.

Structured Settlement Payment had been first introduced in Canada, USA to make it an alternative to one time large payments. Since then, this has been brought into practice to involve large amount of money. In those countries buy structured settlement, is one common phenomenon. The risk factor, which is generally related with the process, gets a complete security.

This system is created when an applicant settles for an extra amount of money and instead of accepting it as one-time, goes for this option to get a steady deal of amount over a certain period. The process of creating an enjoying this is one real simple. One independent party holds the annuity that has been bought by the claimant. Later, this holder, actually, makes the payment to the claimants or the injured parties.
This amount is one completely free from tax. Having it as one tax—free, an extra level of comfort gets created in the complainant making him, doubly sure.

Continue Reading