Connection timed out: If you’re the owner of this website:
Contact your hosting provider letting them know your web server is not completing requests. An Error 522 means that the request was able to connect to your web server, but that the request didn’t finish. The most likely cause is that something on your server is hogging resources. Additional troubleshooting information here.
All of my websites hosted through bootstrap studio’s hosting platform are down. I have not made any changes to the site or my linked cloudflare. These are important sites and this needs urgent attention.
I am certain it is not an issue on my side. Is anyone else experiencing these problems? Thank you.
Bootstrap Studio Sites was down earlier today, because a user had published a phishing website, and as response our hosting provider had cut off the entire server from the internet. The situation is now resolved.
That’s kind of an extreme measure as it pertains to those Bootstrap Studio users whom rely on the BSS site feature for hosting? Assumedly the hosting is just a lumped shared service so this can potentially happen again for BSS users?
I would think BSS would have their client web server mirrored to a second server in the event the main hosting provider has an outage, (or goes down for any other reason.) I mean, most hosts have mirrored server plans by default. This is pretty standard practice in the industry. You can’t just allow people’s websites to go down over something like a bad actor installing malware because this is bound to happen again, and having hundreds (thousands?) of websites go down for even just an hour could easily result in thousands of dollars in lost revenue to the end users.
I realize it will be more costly for BSS, but the solution is simple. Create a third version of the BSS software that has an annual renewal of $50 (or something.) That would be in line with what a person would have to pay for their own server anyway, and cover your added expenses. Giving away free website space is a great selling point, but it’s more important to have reliable service than free hosting.
@bss_user, @printninja In the 3 or 4 years during which the Bootstrap Studio Sites service has been active, this is the first such case. We can’t guarantee that it won’t happen again, but we will restore service as promptly as we can.
It’s possible to engineer Bootstrap Studio Sites so that it is hosted on multiple cloud providers and switches between them if issues arise. But it’s overkill for a service that’s bundled as a free extra, so we will have to tolerate a bit of downtime occasionally.
Making a paid version of the hosting isn’t really an option - this brings with it all sorts of requirements like email, php and database hosting, cpanel, 24h support etc. We are not interested in becoming a hosting company.
I agree with your overall sentiment @Martin. Though admittedly I never looked at the BSS Sites as anything more than a method for testing the apps features much like Saj does.
In my opinion anything client or commercial related should be hosted elsewhere. I can’t imagine using a free or bundled service for clients or commercial work. As such I would not consider it a “Next Generation Website Hosting Platform” as the Sites page title depicts.
You’d be shocked at what I’ve seen laypeople attempt to do with things that were never meant to be used in the ways they ended up using them. The old expression “a little knowledge is dangerous” persists because it’s so true.
Personally, I don’t pay much attention to what people are using BSS Sites for. I would never expect them to go get any kind of hosting package that isn’t shared either. I use a shared hosting Reseller package for my clients, same difference I think so I don’t see an issue here myself. I can count on 2 fingers how many times my server has been down from attacks or outtages in the past 5+ years and it looks to me the same percentage for the BSS Shared hosting.
In the end, even if they did have a dedicated server, they are still subject to jackasses that think it’s fun to DDOS servers. Same thing can happen there and it would then have to be fixed by BSS taking precious time away from development. I prefer to let others handle it myself.
So my 10 cents with 5 cents inflation raise is that it’s fine as it is. Doesn’t matter what they use it for as long as they are aware of the limitations of what they can and cannot upload (I think this is probably an issue at the moment) and that it’s shared hosting. I don’t know if that information is given to them or not, but that would be the only things that would matter to me.
There’s nothing wrong with using shared reseller hosting for 99% of clients. I certainly don’t build the sort of websites or have the sort of clients that need dedicated servers. Those are for companies with massive traffic like facebook, or that need extreme security like government or banks.
But it is important that the host uses mirrored servers (preferably in different physical/geographic locations), so that if one goes down, the other is available to take over. That’s why I like the big name hosting companies even for shared hosting, because if a GoDaddy server in (for example) San Francisco goes down, then the mirror in Ontario Canada can take over instantly.