Just a grumble about 4Webspace. Not sure if this is the right category to post in, but here goes...

I'm happy overall with 4Webspace. We had a few bumps a few weeks ago when Sprint's connection went haywire, but everything past that has been pretty good.

Then they send out the infamous "give us your DNS or else" letter. No matter what you think about hosting DNS on your own server or another server - this was spur of the moment. NO warning whatsoever. And you had mere days to inform your clients and help them get their domains switched (for those that needed to).
Not good. Didn't like that.
And it makes my automatic signup script useless. Sure, the site gets added to the RaQ in 15 minutes or less... but the customer can't see their domain until I get around to seeing the order, going over to Tera-Byte's DNS control panel, adding the info, then waiting for their DNS to refresh. Grr.

Then last night I'm trying to add a new domain to my machine, with a dedicated IP. All goes as normal, I do the DNS on my machine *and* in TB's control panel (because as far as I can tell it hasn't been switched yet), and attempt to go to the IP addy in my browser. No go.
I switch it to 6 different IP addies that I have that are currently free. *None* of them work. I switch DNS off - no go, and can't get to any of my clients' sites (confirming the DNS hasn't been switched yet). I switch it back on. I check the SOA. I check everything. I've remade the domain 6 times and it just ain't working. It's late, so I decide to sit on it for a night.

Tonight I go back. IP still isn't working. Traceroute from samspade.org gets me just inside Tera-Byte's NOC and then times out. It doesn't even get to my machine. However, all of my other sites on the machine are still serving up fine.
I go to TB's Control Panel and check the IP Administration to see what settings TB itself has for my machine.
Lo and behold, they're completely different from what's in my Network settings. Hmm.
So I give it a try - I change my network settings (gateway and netmask only) over to what they have down in the control panel. I know the danger in this, but hey - they advertise 24/7 support/monitoring, right?

Of course, the settings take effect, and now I can't get to my machine at all. Sigh.
So I give them a call. Poor guy on the other end of the phone sounds like I woke him up. I explain my problem to him, and he laughingly says
"You shouldn't have done that."
No sh*t, sherlock. Regardless, I need someone to go kick the machine for me and reset the gateway and netmask (most likely through a serial connection or right off the front of the machine if it can be done that way.)
But wait! What's this he's telling me?
"You have to send an email to the NOC. They'll get around to it."
Umm, can't you just transfer me?
There's no one in our NOC right now. They've all gone home for the evening, there won't be anyone in for another 9 hours or so."
Excuse me?
I explain again that my entire server is unreachable, this entire thing is because none of my free IPs are responding and I need that fixed as well, and attempting to fix it I put in what they had as my settings, which should have been correct. I need someone to look at it now and reset that gateway/netmask info. Don't you say "staffed 24/7" on your website?
Well now he's stumbling. He mumbles something about how there might be a technician still in the NOC working on another problem, but he still won't be able to get to my problem until he's finished with that one - if he doesn't just go home... and in any case, most likely no one will look at my machine until the NOC staff comes back in 9 hours from now. I have to send an email to the NOC. Phone-man can't help me. If someone is at the NOC and if they bother checking the email before they go home, they might check my machine. But most likely not.

So now I'm stuck. It's been 2 hours since I sent the email to the NOC. I got an auto-generated support ticket queue, but that's it. Server still down. No contact from the NOC.

I guess he was right - they had all gone home.

From Tera-Byte's colocation page:
With our colocation services, you can supply your own server and let our highly talented staff monitor it in our first-class network operations centre. As with dedicated server rental, our colocation services feature 24/7 monitoring, a triple redundant power source to ensure maximum uptime, and all servers are hosted in a temperature controlled secure server room with 24 hour armed response security."

And a little further down (next paragraph)...
"Our support staff are on location 24 hours a day, seven days a week to monitor your server. "

Sorry, but to me that means that there is someone there in person 24/7 who can help me - not just a receptionist to answer the phone and tell me to send an email screaming for help.

Grumble grumble. :(

My turn.

After the semi-crash last week, I was unable to connect with my server. I e-mailed the Noc and was informed everything was fine. I tried again and of course it wasn't. I set another e-mail citing the post Steve made here. I received an e-mail that said I needed to talk to Steve directly. I replyed with with situation with no response for a day. I e-mailed Steve at his personal account to no avil. Another day passed and I got a reply from him. Again, I explained my situation only to a day later receive an invoice but no answer. Another day letter I e-mail the NOC asking when I'll be able to access my server. I was told to contact Steve :(. So now I have an invoice for $104 and haven't been able to access my server for about 8 days.

Ouch!! Steve?

Sounds like the cheap raqs finally got the best of them... Too many new clients and not enough support.

ANd too think I recommended many people to them... hmm..

Originally posted by syanet
My turn.

After the semi-crash last week, I was unable to connect with my server. I e-mailed the Noc and was informed everything was fine. I tried again and of course it wasn't. I set another e-mail citing the post Steve made here. I received an e-mail that said I needed to talk to Steve directly. I replyed with with situation with no response for a day. I e-mailed Steve at his personal account to no avil. Another day passed and I got a reply from him. Again, I explained my situation only to a day later receive an invoice but no answer. Another day letter I e-mail the NOC asking when I'll be able to access my server. I was told to contact Steve :(. So now I have an invoice for $104 and haven't been able to access my server for about 8 days.

You neglected to mention that your server was stealing base IPs that were assigned to other servers, thus causing outages for them.

:bawling: you should not do such a thing, i dont know what made you do it tho ?

...Sounds like the cheap raqs finally got the best of them... Too many new clients and not enough support...

:emlaugh: as what they say, you get what you pay for.
though the NOC where our servers are in is not the best but at least when i call at 3am(like 20X) to reboot or fix our machine somebody is there to do it.

elijaH

This is a basic summary of the 2 e-mails I sent explaining the IP problem:

I put all 35 sites that were on my RaQ on my main IP. A week after I got the RaQ I requested, and received, 14 new IP's. I used 2 of those for custom name servers. As for "stealing" IP's, I don't have an explaination. Why would I steal others when I have 12 of my own that are unused? I'm guessing it could have been hacked, but that's just a huntch.

Either way, they finally responded and it's working again.

there is no issue with techsupport for syanet that i can see we had a security issue that forced that machine to be down, the other issue from raven however is totally different and unacceptable and i want to find out more , so raven please email me and give me some specifics so i can find out why the hell that could happen. and yes we do have 24/7 tech support and the person answering the phone should have assisted you.

Steve

oh it was your machine that nicked our ip then ? :P

Apparently, but I have no idea how it happened. I quit my hosting service about 3 weeks ago and have only touched the RaQ once or twice to test scripts. My guess is that it was hacked considering I put no security updates on it. I won't make the mistake again :).

Originally posted by Keeg
there is no issue with techsupport for syanet that i can see we had a security issue that forced that machine to be down, the other issue from raven however is totally different and unacceptable and i want to find out more , so raven please email me and give me some specifics so i can find out why the hell that could happen. and yes we do have 24/7 tech support and the person answering the phone should have assisted you.

Steve


Some one is gonna get :uzi:, wouldnt you say?

Also, Steve, could you please let us know what the problem was? Just to clear things out? Thanx

Let me introduce myself. I'm the Operations Manager at Tera-byte. (The other Steve) Raven, I can understand your plight. I too am stunned by the response that you have gotten from our Network Operations. I will personally look into the problem that you had with our Operations center and will make sure that it doesn't happen again. The response that you got was inexcusable, since you had already tracked down the problem and you would have had the problem fixed within minutes. When we have 24/7 operations, that means that there is comeone available to help you with your request at any time. If there that person at the other end of the phone is not able to deal with it, then there are higher level techs (including Steve and myself) that are able to deal with it. It hasn't been uncommon when we've actually come down to the office within 20 minutes and have problems solved when we get here. Anyways, the damage has been done. Please, drop us an email or give us a call and we'd be happy to discuss things that we can do to make you a happy customer again.

Steve Lam
Manager
Tera-byte.com, Inc.

Update on the server issue - it's being worked on as I speak (type). It looks like the gateway/netmask settings may not be the only problem. Not sure what it could be, but it's being looked into.

Just so you guys know, the fact that Steve and Steve replied to me here on the forum *really* says a lot to me; they could've just ignored it like many other hosts would do. To me that says something about their commitment to their customers.


Raven

You neglected to mention that your server was stealing base IPs that were assigned to other servers, thus causing outages for them.

How this possible?

Surely you operate a switch network rather than a hub network?

I am wondering though if perhaps the reason my free IPs weren't responding is because someone else sniped them. (Lots of detail about this in another thread.) I hadn't seen that thread before this all started; if I had I would've taken a different plan of action.

I've emailed my customers and offered them a free month of service for the downtime; tried to explain what was going on as best I could (given the general level of tech-i-ness of the client base) without being too confusing.

Hopefully they'll understand and accept the free month - they're pretty patient normally but the server's been down for about 14 hours now. (Ack.)

Raven

It's back up and running!
Three cheers for Steve 'n Steve!

Originally posted by MattF
You neglected to mention that your server was stealing base IPs that were assigned to other servers, thus causing outages for them.

How this possible?

Surely you operate a switch network rather than a hub network?

the entire network is switched however that indicates all servers on a subnet would go through a switch interface for the subnet. all ips routed for the subnet are usable by any system on the subnet (or they were) unless you bind the mac address of each server to the ip address (which we now do)

Steve

Originally posted by MattF
You neglected to mention that your server was stealing base IPs that were assigned to other servers, thus causing outages for them.

How this possible?

Surely you operate a switch network rather than a hub network?

We do operate a switched network. A switch only prevents servers from receiving traffic destined to other servers on the switch. This has nothing to do with IP assignments.

However, since this incident, I have created a program and installed it on our gateway servers that static routes IP addresses to specific MAC addresses on the network, which makes it infinitely harder to steal someone else's IP address while it is in use. The program also alerts us to any attempts to steal an IP address, so this shouldn't be an issue in the future.

Originally posted by Raven
I am wondering though if perhaps the reason my free IPs weren't responding is because someone else sniped them. (Lots of detail about this in another thread.) I hadn't seen that thread before this all started; if I had I would've taken a different plan of action.

I've emailed my customers and offered them a free month of service for the downtime; tried to explain what was going on as best I could (given the general level of tech-i-ness of the client base) without being too confusing.

Hopefully they'll understand and accept the free month - they're pretty patient normally but the server's been down for about 14 hours now. (Ack.)

Raven

Are you referring to a routed block of IPs? Routed IPs can only be used by the server they have been routed to. There isn't a way to 'steal' them unless you steal the base IP they are routed to, and that shouldn't be an issue anymore (see my previous post in this thread).

you can steal another ip if the servers are on the same switch :)

Most routers only have a few high speed ports that the switches can be connected into hence per router there may only be 2 switches connected, so you cant hook a machine directly into a router..

Originally posted by Keeg

the entire network is switched however that indicates all servers on a subnet would go through a switch interface for the subnet. all ips routed for the subnet are usable by any system on the subnet (or they were) unless you bind the mac address of each server to the ip address (which we now do)


Steve,

Is there a reason why you don't just create VLANs on the switch? With VLANs you can map certain IP addresses to certain ports and then you don't have to worry about binding MAC addresses etc. If one customer fat fingers their IPs and accidentally inputs another customer's, they simply will not be able to route.

allan

Synet,

It loooks like 4webspace or terrabyte is just getting hit with the BIND problems that people are dealing with all over the net. Or just like Duster said, you get what you pay for, you pay for $99 a month, you will get a $99 service.

Romero

Originally posted by uuallan
Originally posted by Keeg

the entire network is switched however that indicates all servers on a subnet would go through a switch interface for the subnet. all ips routed for the subnet are usable by any system on the subnet (or they were) unless you bind the mac address of each server to the ip address (which we now do)


Steve,

Is there a reason why you don't just create VLANs on the switch? With VLANs you can map certain IP addresses to certain ports and then you don't have to worry about binding MAC addresses etc. If one customer fat fingers their IPs and accidentally inputs another customer's, they simply will not be able to route.

allan

This isn't really feasible. Doing this would monopolize the time of the techs with enough access to the switches to do this sort of thing as it would have to be done for each and every server that is added.

The ARP monitor I added to the gateways takes care of this automatically, so it should do the job just fine.

I dont think thats a fair thing to say. For the $99 you get a better service than most providers that you pay $200 or $300 to.

When users have complained about slowness they have taken care of it. When theres been problems they deal with it dont let it drag out they fix it a.s.a.p

Originally posted by romero
Synet,

It loooks like 4webspace or terrabyte is just getting hit with the BIND problems that people are dealing with all over the net. Or just like Duster said, you get what you pay for, you pay for $99 a month, you will get a $99 service.

Romero

Technics, I really think it is in poor taste for a representative of one hosting company to say that of another hosting company. I'll only say that I have felt that I've gotten far better service than what I've paid tera-byte.

I have been trying not to post recommendations, but just wanted to mention that. I also don't think that if dialtone suffered a bump, representatives of tera would post something like that, and that speaks for itself.

Originally posted by Chicken
Technics, I really think it is in poor taste for a representative of one hosting company to say that of another hosting company.


huh?

Quote:just like Duster said, you get what you pay for, you pay for $99 a month, you will get a $99 service...

ummm i think i said that :P

I have to agree with all of you :) for ///99 bucks..cmon guys give em a break///, if im paying 99 bucks and my server is down say 2-3 days in a month i dont care,... on the other hand if im paying like $200-300-500 they better NOT have any downtime or else i will b*tch about it :P


elijaH






[Edited by elijah on 02-24-2001 at 05:45 PM]

I am an existing customer with 4webspace.com. Their service is much more worth than the $99!!!!!!!

They always reply within a COUPLE OF HOURS and GIVE YOU A SOLUTION. Each network which is exposed is vulnerable, also 4webspace/tera-byte's. I know from a few other providers, and their downtime was even longer.

So stay fair, and such comments like "what you pay is what you get" is TOTALLY unfair against 4webspace/tera-byte. These guys know what they are doing.

A very happy and satisfied customer :D

Originally posted by Chicken
Technics, I really think it is in poor taste for a representative of one hosting company to say that of another hosting company.

Chicken, re-read the thread. I think you have misunderstood Technics.

I think Chicken may have just had a late night :) After a while these threads and posts all begin to look the same.

Greg Moore

No no no, sorry Technics, I was talking about Romero's post and agreeing with *you*... (misunderstanding).

no problemo :)

:beer:

:wavey: