Aloha
well I have been using qwkmon, Internetseer, Serverrat
seems internetseer is the most accurate.
I set up multiple accounts on qwkmon and added the same host.
some funny results
also had some false reports when I could get a site no probelm but qwkmon siad it was down

this was one report :
==============================
Log begins May 29 07:45
Host returned error May 30 18:19
Host resumed status normal May 30 21:26
Host returned error Jun 5 17:08
Host resumed status normal Jun 7 00:43
Host returned error Jun 8 00:06
Host resumed status normal Jun 8 00:10
Host returned error Jun 9 15:09
Host resumed status normal Jun 10 00:31
===================================

the same domain a dif report:
============================
Log begins Jun 9 19:27
Host returned error Jun 9 19:27
Host resumed status normal Jun 10 00:40
=================================

and yet another report :
======================
Log begins May 29 07:41
Host returned error May 30 18:15
Host resumed status normal May 30 20:21
Host returned error Jun 5 17:03
Host resumed status normal Jun 5 23:13
Host returned error Jun 9 15:04
Host resumed status normal Jun 10 00:26
==========================

now this makes me wonder what is up with the service they offer
now I know the accounts are going to go off at dif times but according to other reports the host was not down these times it did go down (its a rackshack what can ya expect)
but was not down like these reports said
funny how they all vary on amount time and number of times

has anybody else done this kind of checking before or using qwkmon ??
I guess in my eyes it is a very inacurate service.

any thoughts ??

Same here. I can access my site no problem but Qwkmon keeps sending me messages telling me that my site can't be accessed. And on every message the ff ad is included:

Message sent: 05:43 AM GMT June 28, 2001
----------------------- ADVERTISEMENT -------------------------

Get great web hosting service from the same company that brings you QWK.Mon!

QWK.Net Web Hosting offers guaranteed great service and 99.9% uptime. Plans start at $7.50 monthly or less!

http://www.qwk.net/

----------------------- ADVERTISEMENT --------------------------


:D :angry: :D :angry:

Aloha,

hmmm so curious how many others will post similiar results??
there was another thread with someone asking about the ads I told him I never read the ads or gave em any attention.

I seem to have been lucky, ive only ever had QWKMON alert me for valid reasons.

I think it depends on how good the connection from QWKMON to your server actually is?

Originally posted by xtstrike
I seem to have been lucky, ive only ever had QWKMON alert me for valid reasons.

I think it depends on how good the connection from QWKMON to your server actually is?

so in your reports there are no times but the time your server was down for sure
ya might try setting up a couple extra accounts and see if they are the same then ???
I thought I was OK till I decide to do this

Originally posted by Honu
Aloha
well I have been using qwkmon, Internetseer, Serverrat
seems internetseer is the most accurate.
I set up multiple accounts on qwkmon and added the same host.
some funny results
also had some false reports when I could get a site no probelm but qwkmon siad it was down
any thoughts ??


QWKMON is not measuring whether or not your host is down, QWKMON is measuring whether or not it can contact your host. That subtle difference in wording is important.

Any network problem between QWKMON and your host will trigger a QWKMON report, even if your host is still up.

Something I might suggest, and I do not know if QWKMON or any of the others do this, would be to run the monitoring service from a NOC with connectivity to various backbones. Then, if QWKMON detects a "site down" condition, it should try to contact that site via the other backbone providers.

This would reduce the problem reports to include only your server, the NOC it is in and that NOC's connectivity. Not completely ideal, but better than the current version.

Aloha
yes a slight bit of words means a lot
but it is still giving way dif reports for the same domain why internetseer seems to be deadon (so far)
from qwkmon home page:

Wouldn't you like to know about web site downtime before your visitors do?
Our logging and reporting tools can even show you if your provider is living up to their service level agreement.


well this would not be true and they can not acurately telly ou if your site is down or just not connecting to the internet they should say
we can not reach your site from our computer but that does no mean it is down
this is my point
so agian my point is it is not a good service and they claimit to be acurate but it is not now if they had computers all over that would somehow check when one can not get through then they might be living to there claim.

they say that this is what they do:


False notification prevention features ensure that pages aren't sent for brief problems that no response would benefit. If a host tests as down, the system will schedule a follow-up check several minutes later. If the host is still down, a page is then sent. Also, before any pages are sent, connectivity is verified to several reference sites, so local network connectivity problems are not interpreted as remote host problems. In case of network problems with a monitoring server, the host failover architecture means another server is picking up the schedules of the unavailable server, preventing loss of monitoring.



Quite literally, if the service doesn't work, our business and our livings are at stake. If you depend on your web site to make a living, shouldn't your monitoring services provider have that same commitment?



these are not words they can back up I am saying
this could lead to hosts getting a bad rap and they are not down or not connected it is qwkmons fault and makes the host look bad that is what I am saying
I think there system has some major flaws
I would think hosting companies would care about this false reporting of qwkmon services :eek:

Also, before any pages are sent, connectivity is verified to several reference sites, so local network connectivity problems are not interpreted as remote host problems. That seems like a weakness compared to, say, Netwhistle. From their website:

If a test indicates that the target is unavailable, then a second test is sent through a second ISP to verify that it is truly unavailable.

If the second test fails to successfully reach the target, then a third test is sent out through a third ISP from a different hosting site located thousands of miles from the first one. So they're not only eliminating local problems on their own network from the mix, like QWK is, but they're also ruling out connectivity problems between any one location and the monitored resource.

Of course, theirs isn't free... (although, by the way, the press page on the site still implies that it is).

Honu:

Creating multiple accounts on QWK.Mon is a violation of the Terms of Service. Please don't do it.

Something to keep in mind about the differing reports on the same host: QWK.Mon defines a host as unreachable if it can't connect in 12 seconds. So, it's possible that the server your site is hosted on is busy, or there is bad connectivity between us and them. You can't compare results from different check times as if they were the same thing.

Mike:

Thanks for your comments. QWK.Mon does check against reference hosts to make sure that a problem local to that NOC isn't interpreted as downtime for monitored sites. The provider we use has over 200 peering agreements, and their service has been exceptionally good.

That said, we do need to squeeze that last bit of accuracy out for people like Honu here. Plans are (and have been) in place to implement a system where QWK.Mon servers can query each other to ensure that a host is unreachable from all.

Oh, and about the ad: that QWK.Net ad was added to fill our unsold inventory. We don't send false pages out just to throw ads out there; page delivery is completely independent of advertising.

About QWK.Mon's current methodology:

- QWK.Mon checks a host at a given time. If it can't connect via HTTP, it will try again immediately. If it still can't connect, that's logged as a failure.
- Upon logging a failure, QWK.Mon schedules another check for a host in about three minutes. If a failure is detected again, appropriate pages are sent.
- QWK.Mon checks against reference hosts to make sure that local network problems aren't interpreted as site outages, but it does not currently "ask" sites at other NOCs about their connectivity to the host.

By the way, Honu:

well this would not be true and they can not acurately telly ou if your site is down or just not connecting to the internet they should say

Do you only want to know if *everybody* can't connect to your site? Wouldn't you like to know if *some people* can't connect, or is that not important to you?

I've used QWK myself and I've found it very useful. Its results are very accurate IMHO. And for a free service, it certainly does a great job!

Personally, I don't care about those ads as long as they're unobtrusive.

qasic

Originally posted by Travis
By the way, Honu:



Do you only want to know if *everybody* can't connect to your site? Wouldn't you like to know if *some people* can't connect, or is that not important to you?

Aloha
yes it is important to me
but according to your stats
this:
Host returned error Jun 5 17:08
Host resumed status normal Jun 7 00:43
vs:
Host returned error Jun 5 17:03
Host resumed status normal Jun 5 23:13

this is one big dif of days not hours days it was reachable by your service but not for another account this shows to me that it is not accurate

another big ????

this:
Host returned error Jun 9 15:09
Host resumed status normal Jun 10 00:31
vs:
Host returned error Jun 9 19:27
Host resumed status normal Jun 10 00:40

OK it might have gone down yes but if it monitors every hour how come the other account did not catch it for over 4 extra hours ?
in this case 2 out of the three looked like they were in synch or closer to it but the third shows it was still up
again an error to me in the system

sorry about the rules but was curious to check it
I am not trying to be so harsh just very odd results on the one when I got a warning I used http://www.tracert.com/
to check if it could be reacehd by other computers and it was OK
a few times it showed one site down for over a day yet it was up the whole time (also had other servers checking it )

I think your site is wonderful and glad you offer free services for this kind of stuff I do not think I would pay for it now
the reports varied way to much I try to never say never so yes I could be wrong but do you ever think maybe something in your programing may not quite be correct and your network could be having problems.
take a look at things like Apache it has patches all the time as some things are wrong with products, Bind another good example.
I can understand you defending your product and am glad you do as it shows you care

and I do again love your site and its services you offer one of the better looking sites out there also
but agian there are things that do not add up and the numbers show it for a paid service which you offer I would have been very disapointed at the figures you may wnat to do some more testing or something.
and again (beating this poor dead horse) for free service ye speople should use it as it has some value better to know a little than none.
but if it is not accurate would I rahter have maybe truths or maybe wrong information or no information
that is my thoughts

One thing to keep in mind is that the code that generates the log reports is completely separate from the code that performs QWK.Mon's main function - paging you when your site is unreachable.

The code that generates reports is early, and could undoubtedly use some work. I've not had any other reports of inaccuracies, but I'd be a fool to rule out bugs. If you could contact me off the board with the name of the hosts in question, I'd be happy to take a look.

I don't by any means insist that QWK.Mon is perfect; I just want a fair shot at fixing problems before you go about trying to convince everybody that it's an unreliable product. :)

Originally posted by Travis
One thing to keep in mind is that the code that generates the log reports is completely separate from the code that performs QWK.Mon's main function - paging you when your site is unreachable.

The code that generates reports is early, and could undoubtedly use some work. I've not had any other reports of inaccuracies, but I'd be a fool to rule out bugs. If you could contact me off the board with the name of the hosts in question, I'd be happy to take a look.

I don't by any means insist that QWK.Mon is perfect; I just want a fair shot at fixing problems before you go about trying to convince everybody that it's an unreliable product. :)

Aloha sure can help ya out am slammed but send an email to me of what you would like

just a note to all I still think for a free service your service is great and was looking at it to keep tabs of my sites and will still tell people to try your serivce along with others ;)

I always go overboard when I check stuff out so agian sorry for breaking your guidelines

glad to put this behind and make your system kick ;)
I hate computers as it shows no personality
I am smiling ;)

Originally posted by Honu

also had some false reports when I could get a site no probelm but qwkmon siad it was down


Same with me few months ago.
I'm no longer use them.
I would suggest you to use uptime arsdigita.

Something to keep in mind...

The code that deals with figuring out a host's status and paging is completely different now than it was three months ago.

A host must now not respond a total of four times within three minutes before a page is sent out.

Haven't had a problem with QWK myself. It's been right on track for various hosts that I use. I did use Internetseer before, but it didn't seem to pickup much of anything.

Just a suggestion:
Instead of telling me when the site is down every single hour, it should tell me when it goes down, and then tell me when it comes back up. That would be much more usefull.

That will actually be added as an option soon - thanks for the suggestion.

I use qwkmon paid service on 15 minute intervals for a few of my servers. I have no complaints with it. It calls me when my box is down and thats what I need.

I also use the paid service with 15 minute intervals for 2 servers. I have lately seen that my hosts go down for 4 minutes and then come back up and it is always for a four minute interval. I know for a fact my hosts have not been down during those times. Strange :confused:

Bert,

If QWK.Mon can't reach a host, it tries again in 3-4 minutes. That's what you're seeing.

It's possible that the host is busy, or that the path between QWK.Mon and your host is congested.