Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 53
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29

    Layered Tech Down?

    Having problems conecting to my layered tech server... SSH, Pings, and obviously HTTP requests fail

    Support does not answer the phone, and ticket creation takes almost 5 minutes after pressing submit... Can't get any contact with them... Is it just me, or is anyone else having problems..???
      0 Not allowed!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chicago IL Equinix IBX
    Posts
    753
    Whats Your Servers IP? so we can ping it from other locations.
      0 Not allowed!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    209.67.214.10
      0 Not allowed!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    North Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,163
    Code:
    H:\>ping 209.67.214.10
    
    Pinging 209.67.214.10 with 32 bytes of data:
    
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=154ms TTL=47
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=158ms TTL=47
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=152ms TTL=47
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=152ms TTL=47
    
    Ping statistics for 209.67.214.10:
        Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
        Minimum = 152ms, Maximum = 158ms, Average = 154ms
    Have you firewalled yourself from your server?

    I can see it fine here ...
      0 Not allowed!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    try pinging ec-hosting.com unable to ping or visit that from 3 connections in 3 different states.... TX, IN, PA none able to get through. Also using 2 different connections in IN 1 cable modem, 1 T1, 2 different providers... no response
      0 Not allowed!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    45
    My server at LT is up. Yours is getting 25% packet loss from my home connection. Heres the ping results from my EV1 server to your IP:

    --- 209.67.214.10 ping statistics ---
    51 packets transmitted, 33 received, 35% packet loss, time 50332ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 16.475/17.253/18.351/0.420 ms, pipe 2
    JB Cowan
    Rack Masters
    Systems Administrator And Owner
    www.RackMasters.net
      0 Not allowed!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chicago IL Equinix IBX
    Posts
    753
    C:\Delgado>ping 209.67.214.10

    Pinging 209.67.214.10 with 32 bytes of data:

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=52
    Request timed out.
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=53ms TTL=52
    Request timed out.

    Ping statistics for 209.67.214.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 2, Lost = 2 (50% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 53ms, Maximum = 55ms, Average = 54ms
    50% loss..

    second time it works fine with 0% loss
      0 Not allowed!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    up and down... still no services responding... still no ssh

    Possible routing issues? no software changes, and no notice on hardware change from LT
      0 Not allowed!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    265
    ping 209.67.214.10

    Pinging 209.67.214.10 with 32 bytes of data:

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=52
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=52
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=52
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=52

    Ping statistics for 209.67.214.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 50ms, Maximum = 50ms, Average = 50ms

    It seems fine. but can not access through internet browser. not sure if its 80 opens.
      0 Not allowed!

  10. #10
    heres results of two pings - first is from my home connection in uk - second is from my server @ LT in savvis

    C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator>ping 209.67.214.10

    Pinging 209.67.214.10 with 32 bytes of data:

    Request timed out.
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=386ms TTL=42
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=465ms TTL=42
    Request timed out.

    Ping statistics for 209.67.214.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 2, Lost = 2 (50% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 386ms, Maximum = 465ms, Average = 425ms
    ping 209.67.214.10
    PING 209.67.214.10 (209.67.214.10) 56(84) bytes of data.
    64 bytes from 209.67.214.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=61 time=9.88 ms
    64 bytes from 209.67.214.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=61 time=10.4 ms
    64 bytes from 209.67.214.10: icmp_seq=4 ttl=61 time=11.2 ms
    64 bytes from 209.67.214.10: icmp_seq=5 ttl=61 time=10.4 ms
    64 bytes from 209.67.214.10: icmp_seq=7 ttl=61 time=10.3 ms
    64 bytes from 209.67.214.10: icmp_seq=8 ttl=61 time=9.95 ms
    64 bytes from 209.67.214.10: icmp_seq=9 ttl=61 time=9.93 ms
    64 bytes from 209.67.214.10: icmp_seq=10 ttl=61 time=10.4 ms

    --- 209.67.214.10 ping statistics ---
    11 packets transmitted, 8 received, 27% packet loss, time 10166ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 9.888/10.342/11.227/0.414 ms, pipe 2
      0 Not allowed!

  11. #11
    i also work with jaspink. I am out of TX and i have tried from school and from home. at school, cant resolve host name. at home, cant resolve hostname, but IP works...somewhat. There is still no SSH, HTTP, FTP, or anyother port access.

    Here is the end my ping log:

    Ping statistics for 209.67.214.10:
    Packets: Sent = 776, Received = 566, Lost = 210 (27% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 44ms, Maximum = 102ms, Average = 46ms

    We have also tried from a florida server and have been unsuccessful.
      0 Not allowed!

  12. #12
    also, try using -t with the ping for the full effect of this. when i got home, i thought it was back up because all 4 packets came back to me. But i soon found out that it was still down
      0 Not allowed!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    204
    My server at LT is fine:
    Pinging 209.67.214.*** [209.67.214.***]:

    Ping #1: Got reply from 209.67.214.*** in 39ms [TTL=51]
    Ping #2: Got reply from 209.67.214.***in 38ms [TTL=51]
    Ping #3: Got reply from 209.67.214.***in 38ms [TTL=51]
    Ping #4: Got reply from 209.67.214.***in 38ms [TTL=51]

    Done pinging 209.67.214.***!
      0 Not allowed!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    785
    Hello,

    This is not a network issue. If you look at the PING results from running a PING test againsts his Gateway IP address (.9) you will see 0% loss. If you go up one IP which is his base IP you see the loss. The means its a problem with your local server and not the network. Please open a support ticket and include this information along with first tryijng to disable any 'iptables' or 'APF' that could be installed to see if that helps.

    If this was a network issue we would also see the loss at your gateway and every hop out. Now we only see it to your servers base IP .10

    Gateway:
    Packets Pings
    Hostname %Loss Rcv Snt Last Best Avg Worst
    1. 99.69-56-159.reverse.theplanet.com 0% 147 147 0 0 5 149
    2. dsr1-1-v2.dllstx2.theplanet.com 0% 147 147 0 0 5 178
    3. dist-vlan21.dsr3-1.dllstx3.theplane 0% 147 147 0 0 5 193
    4. ae0-0.ibr1.dllstx3.theplanet.com 0% 147 147 0 0 1 7
    5. sl-st1-dal-2-1.sprintlink.net 0% 147 147 0 0 8 183
    6. sl-bb27-fw-5-0.sprintlink.net 0% 147 147 0 0 5 114
    7. sl-bb20-fw-13-0.sprintlink.net 0% 147 147 2 2 14 232
    8. sl-bb21-fw-14-0.sprintlink.net 0% 147 147 2 2 16 189
    9. bcr2-so-3-0-0.Dallas.savvis.net 0% 147 147 2 2 5 76
    10. ohr1-pos-1-0.FortWorthda1.savvis.ne 0% 147 147 3 3 4 12
    11. csr1-ve241.FortWorthda1.savvis.net 0% 147 147 3 3 7 271
    12. 216.39.69.54 0% 147 147 4 3 5 15
    13. 209.67.214.9 0% 147 147 5 4 5 22

    # Your base IP.
    Packets Pings
    Hostname %Loss Rcv Snt Last Best Avg Worst
    1. 99.69-56-159.reverse.theplanet.com 0% 22 22 0 0 7 86
    2. dsr1-1-v2.dllstx2.theplanet.com 0% 22 22 0 0 0 8
    3. dist-vlan21.dsr3-1.dllstx3.theplane 0% 22 22 0 0 0 0
    4. ae1-0.ibr1.dllstx3.theplanet.com 0% 22 22 0 0 1 5
    5. 144.223.244.141 0% 22 22 1 0 8 157
    6. 144.232.29.99 0% 22 22 0 0 1 2
    7. sl-bb20-fw-13-0.sprintlink.net 0% 22 22 2 1 12 75
    8. sl-bb21-fw-14-0.sprintlink.net 0% 22 22 2 2 2 3
    9. bcr2-so-3-0-0.Dallas.savvis.net 0% 22 22 2 2 6 76
    10. ohr2-pos-4-0.FortWorthda1.savvis.ne 0% 21 21 3 3 3 4
    11. csr2-ve242.FortWorthda1.savvis.net 0% 21 21 4 3 16 261
    12. 216.39.69.54 0% 21 21 4 3 3 4
    13. ???
    14. thunder.ec-hosting.com 20% 17 21 13 13 13 16

    Thanks

    Jeremy
      0 Not allowed!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,556
    Pinging 209.67.214.10 with 32 bytes of data:

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=53
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=53
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=53
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=53

    Ping statistics for 209.67.214.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 14ms, Maximum = 20ms, Average = 17ms

    Tracing route to thunder.ec-hosting.com [209.67.214.10]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 32 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10.194.64.1
    2 7 ms 7 ms 11 ms gsr-01.ge10-205.mhe.ftwrth.tx.charter.com [66.16
    9.205.129]
    3 7 ms 11 ms 11 ms er73-01.mhe.ftwrth.tx.charter.com [66.169.96.250
    ]
    4 12 ms 11 ms 12 ms 12.124.219.29
    5 11 ms 13 ms 11 ms gbr1-p70.auttx.ip.att.net [12.123.133.22]
    6 16 ms 18 ms 19 ms tbr2-p012301.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.122.10.109]
    7 18 ms 17 ms 17 ms ggr2-p390.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.123.17.85]
    8 17 ms 19 ms 16 ms bcr2-so-6-0-0.Dallas.savvis.net [208.172.139.225
    ]
    9 16 ms 15 ms 16 ms ohr2-pos-4-0.FortWorthda1.savvis.net [208.172.13
    1.86]
    10 16 ms 16 ms 20 ms csr2-ve243.FortWorthda1.savvis.net [216.39.64.51
    ]
    11 19 ms 18 ms 14 ms 216.39.69.54
    12 * * * Request timed out.
    13 12 ms 15 ms 16 ms thunder.ec-hosting.com [209.67.214.10]

    Trace complete.
    James Lumby
      0 Not allowed!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    868
    Pinging 209.67.214.10 with 32 bytes of data:



    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=281ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=281ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=281ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=297ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=281ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=297ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=281ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=281ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=281ms TTL=43

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=281ms TTL=43



    Ping statistics for 209.67.214.10:

    Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),

    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

    Minimum = 281ms, Maximum = 297ms, Average = 284ms
      0 Not allowed!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    Jeremy,
    Can you POSSIBLY tell me WHY in the world you decided to post here with this result, and NOT contact me? Wondering why an LT tech or employee has time to post on WHT, but doesn't have the time to respond to my tickets

    Server came back online just after you posted this, and now seems to be working OK, yet i never had the first response from an LT tech

    How about some customer service BEFORE you start damage control and PR work.

    You asked me to create a ticket... I did.. . 4 of them, and STILL waiting on a response!!!!!

    <<<<<<HONKED OFF CUSTOMER
      0 Not allowed!

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    Server back online as of 3:20 CST

    Interestingly enough just after "LTADMIN" posted....

    STILL waiting on response to my tickets i opened with them....
      0 Not allowed!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    785
    Jaspink,

    You are trying to create tickets with an email account that is hosted on the same server that is down. This prevents our ticket system from accepting them as it has no way to verfiy your email address to be correct or not spam. This is part of the design of the ticket system we use and we have told customers many times in the past to not host their support email account on the same host that could go down. We have also told customers to contact our support team prior to have any issues and register a 2nd 3rd party account with our system to give you another method to open tickets if your primary account is down. This is why you had very slow performance and no tickets opening when you tried to open one earlier. I happen to come across this post on my day off and simply posted a PING result showing it was not a network issue as you where stating.

    To prevent future problems with contacting our support team please register a 2nd account with a 3rd party host like @yahoo or @gmail and ask it to be added to your account so you will not lock yourself out from support again.

    EDIT: I just logged in and saw your single ticket you have. Please note you are also with a reseller and support queries are to be handled by them Please contact your reseller in the future and they can assist you with esculating the problem for quicker resolution. I would also check your host for dDoS drones as we just got a couple abuse reports about DoS traffic being sourced from your IP at over 72mbs.

    Regards,

    Jeremy
    Last edited by Cirrostratus; 04-16-2005 at 04:39 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    might be a VERY VERY good idea to make sure your new customers know this info, rather than telling them after the fact...

    Kinda defeats the purpose of the ticket system if you don't instruct people on the IMPORTANT items regarding that system....

    It's also going to save MANY MANY hours of frustration when you seemingly can't get ahold of the support techs.....

    Understand where I'm coming from?
      0 Not allowed!

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    41
    Looks fine now from a dialup account in Alabama.

    C:\>ping -n 20 209.67.214.10

    Pinging 209.67.214.10 with 32 bytes of data:

    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=294ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=307ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=301ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=292ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=283ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=276ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=277ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=275ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=278ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=288ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=304ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=303ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=279ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=265ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=267ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=273ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=274ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=274ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=280ms TTL=51
    Reply from 209.67.214.10: bytes=32 time=272ms TTL=51

    Ping statistics for 209.67.214.10:
    Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 265ms, Maximum = 307ms, Average = 283ms

    -- David
      0 Not allowed!

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    785
    Jaspink,

    You purchased your server from a reseller of ours. You are not supposed to be even contacting us directly for support as ALL resellers are responsible for supporting their clients. That is part of the reason why they get discounts on the servers and other perks as they are offloading the support from our staff to theirs which can identify you and assist you much quicker then we can. They are also supposed to contact us with any support requests and whenever there is a need for esculation. Your reseller in question has been spoken to in the past about this issue and appears to not be following our reseller agreement and I will speak with him later. They are only supposed to send direct reboot requests to us and nothing more. We have no way to verify any resold clients and can not accept support requests from them directly. Your reboot was an exception earlier but please keep this mind.

    Thanks

    Jeremy
      0 Not allowed!

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    Thanks Jeremy, I understand that.. Issue is, when I can't get my reseller to respond, I gotta have some assitance ASAP...

    What am I supposed to do, when my server is dead, and I get no response... anywhere....?

    i'll check on the DOS issues... can you PM or email me with some info on that? email - jaspink at gmail.com
      0 Not allowed!

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    785
    The only info I see is a long 72mb/s spike outbound on your graph that was on-going until yoru host was rebooted. I would highly suggest you contact a security team that can loginn to your server and clean out any drones that can be hiddens. If they are not removed your host will be used again for further attacks and likely lock you out.

    Check your

    /tmp
    /var/tmp
    /dev/shm/
    /var/spool/mail
    /usr/local/apache/proxy

    For drones and contact a team to dig deeper as there is many places to hide them. Any script owned by 'nobody' or is excutable would be suspect and should either be removed wiith rm or set 'chmod 000'.

    I need to step away now so I will not respond for some time.

    Thanks

    Jeremy
      0 Not allowed!

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    10,574
    Originally posted by jaspink
    Thanks Jeremy, I understand that.. Issue is, when I can't get my reseller to respond, I gotta have some assitance ASAP...

    What am I supposed to do, when my server is dead, and I get no response... anywhere....?

    i'll check on the DOS issues... can you PM or email me with some info on that? email - jaspink at gmail.com
    And that is why resellers are not a good idea. IMHO
    MediaLayer, LLC - www.medialayer.com Learn how we can make your website load faster, translating to better conversion rates for your business!
    The pioneers of optimized web hosting, featuring LiteSpeed Web Server & SSD Storage - Celebrating 10 Years in Business
      0 Not allowed!

  26. #26
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Kirkland, WA
    Posts
    4,448
      0 Not allowed!

  27. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by jaspink
    might be a VERY VERY good idea to make sure your new customers know this info, rather than telling them after the fact...

    Kinda defeats the purpose of the ticket system if you don't instruct people on the IMPORTANT items regarding that system....

    It's also going to save MANY MANY hours of frustration when you seemingly can't get ahold of the support techs.....

    Understand where I'm coming from?
    Seems to be common sense if your server is down, the same server your mail server is hosted on, to use another e-mail account that is on another server. Obviously, if your server is just dead and your mail server is on it, your mail will not get through.
      0 Not allowed!

  28. #28
    Originally posted by jaspink
    Thanks Jeremy, I understand that.. Issue is, when I can't get my reseller to respond, I gotta have some assitance ASAP...

    What am I supposed to do, when my server is dead, and I get no response... anywhere....?
    Get a provider who will give you round the clock responses?
      0 Not allowed!

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    NYC, USA
    Posts
    463
    Originally posted by nickn
    Agreed. You should be thanking LT for assisting as much as they have. You choose to go with a reseller in order to receivea lower price, there's a reason they are able to offer that lower price..
    Actually LT's dedicated servers are unmangaged and several of its resellers offer managed servers, so it really is just the opposite. But it is nice of LT to help out here given its not their responsibility
    Last edited by greggish; 04-16-2005 at 05:17 PM.
    "I highly suggest you quietly fade away." -President of Invision Power Services, Charles Warner -- PM to me after banning me (a lifetime license holder) for expressing my opinion that IP Dynamic will not sell, and is taking time away from the development of IPB.
      0 Not allowed!

  30. #30
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Kirkland, WA
    Posts
    4,448
    Originally posted by greggish
    Actually LT's dedicated servers are unmangaged and several of its resellers offer managed servers, so it really is just the opposite. But it is nice of LT to help out here given its not their responsibility
    Many of LT's resellers are unmanaged too, if this one is managed, it only proves my point further. Regardless, the reseller isn't providing the same quality of support that would have been provided if the client would've paid a few extra $ and gone directly with LT (and purchased managed services elsewhere if needed.)
      0 Not allowed!

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    Seems to be common sense if your server is down, the same server your mail server is hosted on, to use another e-mail account that is on another server. Obviously, if your server is just dead and your mail server is on it, your mail will not get through.
    Wasn't talking about not getting mail... I was using my support account with LT... how am i supposed to know they check for valid email addresses before the ticket is created?
      0 Not allowed!

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    Please understand I am very grateful to LT for their support on this... It's just incredibly frustrating to not be able to get a response anywhere you turn...

    I know the downfalls of using a reseller. I am capable of managing my own server... Not at the point yet to get my own discounts, but getting close on number of dedicated servers. Therefor, it's a matter of how much money can be saved for a small company... Yes, it's a trade off in support...

    I do want to comment, that this is the first issue we've EVER had with that server...

    Hardware and network connectivity through LT has ALWAYS been excellent, and I couldn't be happier from that end!
      0 Not allowed!

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    1,838
    so im asuming that your in the savvis datacenter in texas?
    Computer Steroids - Full service website development solutions since 2001.
    (612)234-2768 - Locally owned and operated in the Minneapolis, Minnesota area.
      0 Not allowed!

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Doylsetown, Pa
    Posts
    64
    ok im going to post my 2 cents here. Jaspink and myself are busisness partners and i can say a few things so people have an understanding where we are comming from instead of "well reseller bad" or "blah blah blah"

    We purchaced the server from UltraUnix through host quote. Did not know he was a reseller of LT all he said was that our server was in the Savvis DC in TX which was where we wanted the server. Tx is the base for games servers. The planet would have been better but we were happy. As of 3 weeks ago when we purchaced a server from another company directly because of a package that they could not meet. So it has been approx 3 weeks and i have not gotten one responce from ultra unix.
    Now i have to deal with dos drones. I just did a security audit and none exist. Seeing that i am not going to get help from UU is there a way to have the server transfered to layered tech directly? That would probably be better but seeing as i still have 3 months left on my prepay im stuck

    What would everyone do in my situation? hide? lol
      0 Not allowed!

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, AU
    Posts
    1,392
    Originally posted by vcampellone
    ok im going to post my 2 cents here. Jaspink and myself are busisness partners and i can say a few things so people have an understanding where we are comming from instead of "well reseller bad" or "blah blah blah"

    We purchaced the server from UltraUnix through host quote. Did not know he was a reseller of LT all he said was that our server was in the Savvis DC in TX which was where we wanted the server. Tx is the base for games servers. The planet would have been better but we were happy. As of 3 weeks ago when we purchaced a server from another company directly because of a package that they could not meet. So it has been approx 3 weeks and i have not gotten one responce from ultra unix.
    Now i have to deal with dos drones. I just did a security audit and none exist. Seeing that i am not going to get help from UU is there a way to have the server transfered to layered tech directly? That would probably be better but seeing as i still have 3 months left on my prepay im stuck

    What would everyone do in my situation? hide? lol
    Have you tried contacting UltraUnix for help?
    SERVSTRA | THE HIGH BANDWIDTH SERVER SPECIALISTS
    Lowest prices on 2Gbps, 5Gbps & 10Gbps DEDICATED unmetered servers!!!
    █ Custom 10Gbps unmetered clustered server solutions! Email us for more info!
    Over 24 world wide locations to choose from!
      0 Not allowed!

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    Finally have a response from them... the reason we/I contacted LT directly, was because we were unable to get a response from UU...

    a full 12 - 15 hours AFTER the fact, we heard from UU....

    Props to LT though for taking care of us!
      0 Not allowed!

  37. #37
    Originally posted by jaspink
    Thanks Jeremy, I understand that.. Issue is, when I can't get my reseller to respond, I gotta have some assitance ASAP...

    What am I supposed to do, when my server is dead, and I get no response... anywhere....?
    You're missing the point. I understand that you want some support, but LT isn't supposed to provide that support. Just because you rent from an LT reseller doesn't mean you turn to LT when your reseller starts sucking. I think Jeremy showed quite a bit of class just by responding to you in the first place.

    If you rent a server from LT that's sitting in TP's datacenter, and LT doesn't respond to your tickets, are you going to try to get support from TP? They'll just laugh at you if you do.

    If your reseller sucks, go somewhere else, it's pretty simple. Or just buy from LT directly.
      0 Not allowed!

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    29
    Hey Pergesu.. how about you read my last line before you start flamin me... PAY ATTENTION

    Props to LT though for taking care of us!
      0 Not allowed!

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    468
    Originally posted by LTADMIN
    Hello,

    This is not a network issue. If you look at the PING results from running a PING test againsts his Gateway IP address (.9) you will see 0% loss. If you go up one IP which is his base IP you see the loss. The means its a problem with your local server and not the network.
    This is not always true. A problem with an overloaded/offline access switch can cause this -- the gateway IP is typically responded to by the router, while the server IP response must pass through one or more layers of additional switching gear.
    bye
      0 Not allowed!

  40. #40
    Originally posted by jaspink
    Hey Pergesu.. how about you read my last line before you start flamin me... PAY ATTENTION
    I did read that, and I think it's good you thanked them. I'm just pointing out that you shouldn't have contacted them in the first place, so hopefully you'll know for the future not to complain on WHT when LT doesn't give you support.

    It's not a flame, just trying to keep this place clean of misguided complaints towards my favorite provider
      0 Not allowed!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •