Managed.com Down [merged]

Portal Home > Knowledgebase > Articles Database > Managed.com Down [merged]

Posted by bimmer, 03-15-2004, 11:51 PM
Down from 20:30 CST. Anyone else? I sent them an email, hopefully they'll get it up soon.
Posted by jasonl813, 03-15-2004, 11:57 PM
I haven't had any downtime on either of my servers today. I will say that my data transfer rates seem to be going a lot slower, but it may just be something on my ISP end since I am not losing packets or experiencing high pings.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-16-2004, 12:04 AM
totally fine here. Was loading a touch slow before, but I was browsing their site whilst they were updating it, so thats probably the reason. All my managed.com servers are also up and running fine.
Posted by PandServers, 03-16-2004, 12:28 AM
My box is ultra slow as well, normally get 50-350k/s from the box, now getting 10-15k/s.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-16-2004, 12:30 AM
No problems on any of mine, just tested them as you had me worried but im getting around 240k/s
Posted by joshiee, 03-16-2004, 10:16 PM
My box seems down now
Posted by Cirtex, 03-16-2004, 10:34 PM
http://managed.com/ loading for me fine.
Posted by Niftex, 03-16-2004, 10:37 PM
http://managed.com/ Loading slow for me
Posted by Tee, 03-16-2004, 11:07 PM
Down for me.
Posted by Joshua, 03-16-2004, 11:21 PM
Their main site is down, but I can get to some sites hosted on servers there. Looks like some IPs are routing over XO, while others are going over Abovenet. vs vsIn other words, I'm seeing 3 different routes for 3 different IPs at Managed.com. I wouldn't really trust their networking abilities if that sort of situation is happening... -Josh
Posted by simonhouse, 03-16-2004, 11:39 PM
Thats the first hint of XO I have seen, I'm getting similar routes across XO from here. Thanks for posting that Josh Now we just need a sweepstake or something to guess how many days/weeks/months/years(?!) it will be until Managed.com get everything running properly
Posted by bimmer, 03-16-2004, 11:51 PM
It's finally up after over 14 hours. They really need to fix that after hours support issues. It's my worst downtime yet and hopefully their support will improve soon before something like this happens again.
Posted by ZoneServ.com, 03-17-2004, 02:01 AM
loading extra slow for me/
Posted by cybexhost1, 03-17-2004, 02:05 AM
managed.com Loading fine for me.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-17-2004, 05:24 AM
Not had any problems (or even reports of problems) since the outages last weekend so anyone who is experiencing them, I suggest they contact their ISP make sure its not their end.
Posted by Matt, 03-17-2004, 10:01 AM
That sure is a lot of ISP's causing the issue then
Posted by RackRhino, 03-17-2004, 02:16 PM
seems like im down to.
Posted by jasonl813, 03-17-2004, 02:17 PM
Both my servers just went down.
Posted by PhoneSupport, 03-17-2004, 02:18 PM
And so have mine.
Posted by Synwave, 03-17-2004, 02:18 PM
Down here too
Posted by simonhouse, 03-17-2004, 02:19 PM
All down. Unable to reach my server from anywhere! Edit - as I posted, it came back, over layer42 though...
Posted by jasonl813, 03-17-2004, 02:20 PM
One server just came up.
Posted by deieno, 03-17-2004, 02:21 PM
down for me to, from here managed's site is down to
Posted by rcthost, 03-17-2004, 02:24 PM
All of my servers just went down but they are back up now.
Posted by cyberultra, 03-17-2004, 02:24 PM
Just came up but slow. Anyway, no PL, 60 packets transmitted, 60 received, 0% packet loss, time 59630ms
Posted by jasonl813, 03-17-2004, 02:26 PM
The strange thing is I can tracert to the server that is still down. Anyone else doing the same?
Posted by xp101, 03-17-2004, 02:32 PM
Yeah, same here.
Posted by cyberultra, 03-17-2004, 02:34 PM
Yes, same here. No problem to ping, but sites are down..
Posted by sysadm, 03-17-2004, 02:38 PM
Their slogan should be "Network outage every day". BTW. It's interesting that imcp and udp packets goes good, but all tcp are filtered out Regards, sysadm
Posted by yaax, 03-17-2004, 02:40 PM
Yes, I have same problem here - all http connections work ok, but pings are failed.
Posted by jasonl813, 03-17-2004, 02:42 PM
Both servers are down now, again...
Posted by simonhouse, 03-17-2004, 02:44 PM
Up and down here. They seem to be ignoring the warnings in their BGP training manuals - "Do not try this exercise on a live network" Btw - this RTT doesn't look too healthy 64 bytes from 65.75.142.xx: icmp_seq=6 ttl=51 time=666.666 ms
Posted by jasonl813, 03-17-2004, 02:52 PM
Going through layer42 now. I find this router appropriately named (bungi-gw1.layer42.net) since the network keeps going up and down.
Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 02:53 PM
It's really slow right now... 9 111 ms 113 ms 113 ms bpr1-ae2.LosAngeles.cw.net [208.172.47.67] 10 111 ms 113 ms 113 ms beyond-the-network.LosAngeles.cw.net [208.173.57 30] 11 121 ms 123 ms 123 ms pos1-0.cr02.sjo01.pccwbtn.net [63.218.6.33] 12 121 ms 121 ms 125 ms 63.218.7.6 13 * * 144 ms f2-0-1.core1.sjc.layer42.net [69.36.239.61] 14 390 ms * * f0-0.core2.sjc.layer42.net [69.36.239.57] 15 * * * Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé. 16 * * * Délai d'attente de la demande dépassé. 17 1100 ms * * assertive.managed.com [66.154.102.5] 18 * 865 ms * 66.79.176.XXX 19 * 865 ms 858 ms 66.79.176.XXX
Posted by yaax, 03-17-2004, 02:56 PM
What is this now? DDOS atack? Network upgrade? or something else?
Posted by DeltaAnime, 03-17-2004, 02:59 PM
I'm getting up and down type speeds right now. I trace/ping ~40 to them over above, and can download sometimes at 190KB/sec. Though, that's been the first time since yesterday that i've been able todo that this morning, and yesterday, I was ~5KB/sec Not fun, but at least the service is up. ~Francisco
Posted by tommyd, 03-17-2004, 03:01 PM
I do know of planned network maintiance today. I am assuming this is part of the maintiance.
Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 03:02 PM
You're lucky, mine is down.. I can't even reach managed.com website.
Posted by tommyd, 03-17-2004, 03:04 PM
Only Some Segments are down, not their entire network from what I have noticed so far at least.
Posted by ChoirBoy, 03-17-2004, 03:06 PM
Yup ... can't even ping my server. ACK!
Posted by simonhouse, 03-17-2004, 03:07 PM
Why am I never informed of planned network maintenance? Since the DC is in North America, wouldn't it make more sense to perform scheduled maintenance off-peak instead of the busiest time of day... ?
Posted by e-infinity, 03-17-2004, 03:08 PM
their site = down anyone in the 66.79.180.XXX range ?
Posted by forumtalk, 03-17-2004, 03:09 PM
Me too
Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 03:12 PM
MSG Inc. ? Some explanation ?
Posted by ckh, 03-17-2004, 03:13 PM
69.79.172 completely down for me.
Posted by simonhouse, 03-17-2004, 03:13 PM
65.75.142.* Has been dead for at least 30 minutes now.
Posted by RackRhino, 03-17-2004, 03:14 PM
http://65.75.128 down for me all 4 servers
Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 03:14 PM
66.79.176.* down
Posted by hostbox, 03-17-2004, 03:15 PM
I think they don't visit WHT since they're flammed a lot ~cruel reality
Posted by Doggy, 03-17-2004, 03:15 PM
66.79.170.XXX - DOWN 65.75.156.XX - DOWN 66.79.163.XX - DOWN
Posted by jakub, 03-17-2004, 03:17 PM
its defitivily a routing thing, i could reach mine from home, but i can't hit it from any other locations. Wonder when they will get this figured out. I wish they would perform their upgrades from midnight to 6am like most companies do..
Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 03:18 PM
Well, he used to visit this site..
Posted by ChoirBoy, 03-17-2004, 03:20 PM
Odd, I ping one of my sites at managed (66.79.179.178), and I get UUNet unreachable (157.130.40.253) ----------------------------------------- Pinging 66.79.179.178 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 157.130.40.253: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 157.130.40.253: Destination host unreachable. Request timed out. Reply from 157.130.40.253: Destination host unreachable. Ping statistics for 66.79.179.178: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 3, Lost = 1 (25% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms
Posted by mostaman, 03-17-2004, 03:21 PM

Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 03:23 PM
Yes, they are.
Posted by thedavid, 03-17-2004, 03:24 PM
Split the thread from the dedicated server forum over here. Please comment on the downtime in the outages/updates forum.
Posted by thedavid, 03-17-2004, 03:27 PM
Merged another one.
Posted by friendzone, 03-17-2004, 03:28 PM
holy, i am going to stay away from managed.com, I just tried two weeks, and I have 5 times down time, that's not good at all.
Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 03:29 PM
Back, but slow as hell
Posted by Synwave, 03-17-2004, 03:29 PM
Nice one.....my server is back
Posted by simonhouse, 03-17-2004, 03:32 PM
Back, but still routing via layer42.
Posted by DeltaAnime, 03-17-2004, 03:33 PM
I can get to 66.79.190.*, and it passes over bungi.net (who're they?). ~Francisco
Posted by AP2k2, 03-17-2004, 03:34 PM
on an off in the last few hours. When download files from my box, the speed still at ~5KB/s
Posted by xAngelx, 03-17-2004, 03:38 PM
They are sorting out issues with the new XO line.
Posted by e-infinity, 03-17-2004, 03:41 PM
I am gonna stick with Managed.com if this "Upgrade" is really gonna happen. Apprently, i've looked around, and what I want out of managed.com costs around 170-250 a month, in all other places. Anyone going through any XO lines, post your tracerts. If it happens. (& your location)
Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 03:43 PM
15 292 ms 292 ms 313 ms bungi-gw1.layer42.net [69.36.239.131] I would say they are layer42
Posted by yaax, 03-17-2004, 03:49 PM
I see it is ok now all traffic go through above.net I need to know how much time network was totally down for all locations? For me it was down for 1 hour, for some monitoring places it was down 2 hours...
Posted by DeltaAnime, 03-17-2004, 03:50 PM
Tracing route to 65.75.170.xx over a maximum of 30 hops 2 40 ms 40 ms 60 ms 24.68.208.1 3 30 ms 40 ms 30 ms rd1cv-ge3-1.gv.shawcable.net [64.59.161.130] 4 71 ms 40 ms 40 ms rc1wh-atm0-3-1.vc.shawcable.net [66.163.76.97] 5 70 ms 30 ms 30 ms POS5-0.GW3.VAN1.ALTER.NET [205.150.222.125] 6 40 ms 40 ms 30 ms 0.so-1-0-0.XL1.VAN1.ALTER.NET [152.63.137.130] 7 50 ms 40 ms 40 ms 0.so-7-0-0.TL1.VAN1.ALTER.NET [152.63.138.74] 8 101 ms 60 ms 70 ms 0.so-2-0-0.TL1.SCL2.ALTER.NET [152.63.1.13] 9 70 ms 91 ms 60 ms 0.so-4-0-0.XL1.SCL2.ALTER.NET [152.63.0.254] 10 50 ms 70 ms 60 ms 0.so-6-1-0.BR1.SCL2.ALTER.NET [152.63.48.13] 11 80 ms 50 ms 100 ms 204.255.174.254 12 140 ms 80 ms 130 ms p4-2-0.RAR2.SanJose-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.5.185] 13 60 ms 60 ms 70 ms p0-0-0.MAR2.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.5.138] 14 71 ms 60 ms 60 ms p15-0.CHR1.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [207.88.80.182] 15 121 ms 80 ms 70 ms 67.104.60.222.ptr.us.xo.net [67.104.60.222] 16 60 ms 50 ms 50 ms 65.75.170.xx It looks like it routes over diff things. I'm on the west coast, so for me, it's bungi. For others, i'm sure it's layer42. As for the tracert, it seems that anything on the 65.75.170.xx network, is going over xo.net for me. ~Francisco
Posted by Edgewize, 03-17-2004, 03:50 PM
Bungi.net appears to be a few guys who own a small netblock inside Above.net space: Abovenet Communications, Inc ABOVENET-1 (NET-207-126-96-0-1) 207.126.96.0 - 207.126.127.255 Bungi Communications NET-ABOVE-BUNGI (NET-207-126-97-0-1) 207.126.97.0 - 207.126.97.255 Not sure why anything should be routing through them, though. They aren't an ISP, just a couple guys running a mini hosting business (see bungi.com). Maybe Above.net is still using some parts of their IP space.
Posted by PhoneSupport, 03-17-2004, 03:52 PM
Us as clients of managed.com should get informed about anything which may affect our service. We are paying a monthly fee, so surly we deserve to find out about any downtime or network maintenance. Some people have inportant information and data on the server, and knowing when downtime will be is very important. How many "Managed.com is down" topics are there in the Network outages page aye? I personally also think a website should be put up on a seperate server to inform users of downtime, and any problems users may experiance. Perhaps even a newsletter where we can be informed of the problems. Managed.com needs to improve customer relations/support.
Posted by utsn, 03-17-2004, 04:00 PM
Yeah.. I don't even know what to tell to my customers..
Posted by forumz, 03-17-2004, 04:01 PM
my servers are very slow. what shame of a hosting company they are
Posted by THW-Dave, 03-17-2004, 04:05 PM
Normally the right thing to do is work all the bugs out of the new line, before you route traffic to it..
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-17-2004, 04:21 PM
Im sorry, but if you dont like them, why are with them???
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-17-2004, 04:25 PM
Hold on, at the time, the only two supposed issues with managed.com since thier weekend outages were found to be false As I have pointed out, some ISP's are routing via Layer42 which is running slow and others are routing via AboveNet which is fine. I know this, because my cable (ntl) is routing via Layer42 yet my SDSL (BT/Bulldog) is routing via AboveNet. Therefore there is absolutely no need for you to question this.
Posted by DeltaAnime, 03-17-2004, 04:29 PM
Go Sash! stick it to the man! Ya, i'll confirm though. My friends back east are routing layer42, or not routing at all. Over here i'm routing bungi/aboveNET/XO. Though, the XO routing only seems to be on a 65.x.x.x class of ip's they own. ~Francisco
Posted by HairToStay, 03-17-2004, 04:36 PM
Been with managed.com a month and have been extremely unhappy. Site has been down at least 12 times today (I receive email each time it goes down) and I've lost 75% of my traffic over this. Does anyone EVER answer the phone there??????? I've left countless phone messages, and sent in countless "help(less) desk" submissions without a word. Even a threat of a credit card chargeback does nothing. When it was up for a few I began an FTP and it went from 150k/sec down to 0.10k/sec and stayed there. For the next 45 minutes it 'timed out'. Traceroutes are all over the place with the oddest outputs. I'm 65.75.140.* and I'm now going through abovenet. I've spent this morning looking for another host.
Posted by Edgewize, 03-17-2004, 04:39 PM
Now, no offense, but some of you guys make me scratch my head. Look at the prices Managed.com offers, and then look at their web site's "support" content. Can you really tell me with a straight face that you didn't expect any outages when you signed up? If so, I have several bridges and a small Carribean island to sell you.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-17-2004, 04:47 PM
what I cant understand is if they are all so upset by managed.com, why the hell are they with them??? Also, I cant understand why a few individuals seem to think they have the right to comment on the state of both a network and support they have never used. Too much time on their hands I suppose...
Posted by sinwave, 03-17-2004, 05:19 PM
pricing, outages, whatever. that comes with the price range. the _only_ thing that bothers me is that if this is supposed to be some sort of planned maintainence, at least send out an announcement!
Posted by Matt, 03-17-2004, 05:32 PM
I have every right to question an instance where someone is not being honest and tries to pass the blame when there are facts proving otherwise. Don't know how you could miss them, but here are a few posts made in the past two days...BEFORE the issue today: Started 3/16/2004 7:52 PM (CT) http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...hreadid=248746 Minimum 4 individuals complaining of poor connectivity in that thread (not including the thead starter) Started 3/16/2004 2:56 PM (CT) http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...hreadid=248621 Minimum 5 individuals in that thread So now you are saying all of those posts are false and there were no issues in the past two days? It was not one or two people complaining, it was several. They use different ISP's and are located all over the world. Just because you do not notice an issue does not mean one does not exist. It certainly existed to all the users in those threads and I am sure they appreciate your claim that their issues were false.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-17-2004, 05:37 PM
Well if I have had no issues on my BT line and speed issues on my ntl line and also have customers who have noticed speed probs on some ISP and others on different ISP's or locations who have had no problem then I would guess its the ISP routing via Layer42 over AboveNet Not a problem at managed.com's end. Its people like you who just simply like to critisize managed.com constantly and as I said - too much time on your hands if thats how you pass your time.... its pretty pointless
Posted by Matt, 03-17-2004, 06:47 PM
Not sure why you think I always criticize them, I rarely speak of managed. If I do, it is usually in context with the policies here (ie: using WHT as a support forum). Managed chose to use layer42 as their backup. Therefore it is their issue if that is the cause of the problem. My comments would be the same if this was occuring at rackshack, rackspace, or servermatrix. Managed's clients are suffering as a result of their inability to maintain their network. That's the bottom line. I would much rather see no "managed down" threads....I think that goes for most people. Why? Because no one likes to see providers have downtime, regardless if they are using them or not. Downtime affects the reputation of the industry. I hope that managed are able to reverse the slide they have been taking as of late and redeem themselves. Only time will tell if they are able to do so. I hope for your sake they are.
Posted by ice-man2020, 03-17-2004, 06:47 PM
They don't care about how their clients feel guys. Even you send them support tickets for hundred of them, they still don't care. They don't bother to reply back to you...They are suck.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-17-2004, 06:52 PM
29 out of 29 support tickets answered so far. Thats 100%. 21 tickets answered within 30 minutes. So its that bad yeah? Fair enough Matt, I suppose im probably mistaking you for a member of the sad little clan that seem get a kick out of basically critisizing managed.com. I do apologise. Yes we all hate downtime, but its not always the provider/dc, it is sometimes the ISP, as we have seen from far too many of the Outage alerts posted on WHT.
Posted by jasonl813, 03-17-2004, 07:52 PM
The response I received from managed.com.
Posted by ice-man2020, 03-17-2004, 08:06 PM
LISTEN UP MAN, I can understand the downtime. But don't you think they should at least put out the announcement for all of us?? We don't use their server for free, we pay for it. Don't you think! they should do the business proper way!
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-17-2004, 08:18 PM
Like I say, if you dont like it, leave....
Posted by ice-man2020, 03-17-2004, 08:42 PM

Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-17-2004, 08:46 PM
Dont get angry with me mate, if I dont like a service or a product that I am paying for, or it does not meet my needs or standards, then its simple, I either cease the service (your not under contract) or take the product back for a refund and look elswhere at something different. Only somebody silly would keep paying for something that was utter crap and not worth the money in their opinion
Posted by ChoirBoy, 03-17-2004, 11:32 PM
I agree. I need to be able to depend on a system. Outtages happen. But they're far more manageble when we're ready for and/or informed of them.
Posted by ifingers, 03-18-2004, 08:06 AM
I am generally very pleased with the service from managed - but the last 2-3 days my site has been very slow. Not just for me but for my many users. How do I determine if it's my server that is at fault or the managed network? Thanks
Posted by PhoneSupport, 03-18-2004, 12:03 PM
Well, I would love to leave managed.com, but I cant at the moment as I am constantly getting new clients, and all the hassel to move all the clients to the new server, they will simply scream at me! I like the support when you ask questions, and no I do not expect top notch to the minute support, but when I said they should improve Customer Relations/support, I meant sending an email to us, or even creating a Blog Website, letting us know what is going on and when it will be fixed. When clients ask what has happened to their servers, we simply say "The Server is down" and thats the most I can say, unless I start guessing/giving false information. If managed could create such a website, I would be 100% happy with their service, not 75%. Hopefully someone will read this from Managed.com and sort this out. Regards, James Parmee Morris
Posted by mcraft, 03-18-2004, 09:21 PM
Managed servers unaccessible again. Anyone else.....
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-18-2004, 09:33 PM
No problems here whatsoever In fact, just done tracerts to servers on both the Above and XO lines to test something as per a thread in the dedicated server forum.
Posted by xAngelx, 03-18-2004, 09:45 PM
The problem isn't Managed.com's ability to maintain a stable network, the problem is Abovenet themselves and there is not much they can do with that as it's not up to them to manage Abovenets equipment. That's why they brought XO in, and why they are adding an additional router in front of both the XO and Abovenet lines to try and solve some of the problems (IE route people over XO if Abovenet acts up). Layer42 is a lost cause on it's best day. This isn't in defence of anyone or anything, just a statement of facts, I've had a lot of emails flying back and forth between the owners and I as I had serious questions as to what they are doing to get rid of the issues. I have servers on all the lines (XO, Abovenet and layer42). XO being the best atm but in order to add new blocks they have to reconfigure the router everytime so they are limiting traffic on there to 65.75.160.x and above till they get the other router installed on the lines before the abovenet and XO routers and they'll preconfigure that for what they need. That should sort out some of the issues (they are expecting the router Monday or Tuesday) Last edited by xAngelx; 03-18-2004 at 09:49 PM.
Posted by adamp, 03-18-2004, 09:46 PM
Been down for me for a while now as well. Seems to be getting stuck somewhere on XO, or as XO enters the DC. 1 24 ms 25 ms 23 ms lon1-adsl6.nildram.net [213.208.106.124] 2 23 ms 25 ms 23 ms lon1-adsl6.nildram.net [213.208.106.124] 3 23 ms 23 ms 25 ms lon1-10.nildram.net [213.208.106.195] 4 24 ms 24 ms 25 ms lon1-6.nildram.net [195.149.20.132] 5 25 ms 24 ms 25 ms 246.ge6-0.mpr1.lhr1.uk.above.net [213.161.78.109 ] 6 25 ms 25 ms 26 ms so-4-1-0.cr1.lhr3.uk.above.net [208.184.231.174] 7 96 ms 97 ms 95 ms so-7-0-0.cr1.dca2.us.above.net [64.125.31.186] 8 98 ms 97 ms 95 ms 64.125.29.122.available.above.net [64.125.29.122 ] 9 95 ms 97 ms 97 ms so-6-0-0.cr2.iad1.us.above.net [64.125.28.130] 10 97 ms 97 ms 97 ms 64.125.29.134.available.above.net [64.125.29.134 ] 11 97 ms 97 ms 95 ms so-3-0-0.mpr1.iad10.us.above.net [64.125.30.117] 12 96 ms 98 ms 97 ms p5-2.IR1.Ashburn-VA.us.xo.net [64.125.12.82] 13 98 ms 99 ms 99 ms p5-0-0.RAR1.Washington-DC.us.xo.net [65.106.3.13 3] 14 175 ms 175 ms 173 ms p1-0-0.RAR1.SanJose-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.0.38] 15 174 ms 173 ms 173 ms p0-0-0.MAR1.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.5.134] 16 172 ms 173 ms 173 ms p0-0.CHR1.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [207.88.80.178] 17 * * * Request timed out. 18 * * 67.104.60.222.ptr.us.xo.net [67.104.60.222] reports: Des tination host unreachable. Trace complete.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-18-2004, 09:53 PM
Here is my trace on my SDSL: Here is the trace on my ntl cable: All seems to be running fine so its not managed that are down Although my cable is still rotuing via Layer42 for some reason Regards, Matty
Posted by mcraft, 03-18-2004, 10:01 PM
Tracert from my dialup, so ignore the time. My SDSL router do not allow tracert. Trace broke at xo before entering managed. Tracing route to 65.75.166.140 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 110 ms 120 ms 120 ms l1-ras5-2.starhub.net.sg [203.117.32.199] 2 114 ms 120 ms 120 ms vlan2-rsm2.starhub.net.sg [203.117.32.35] 3 121 ms 120 ms 120 ms vl15-s20.cyberway.com.sg [203.117.0.57] 4 121 ms 120 ms 120 ms 203.118.1.4 5 181 ms 400 ms 461 ms 203.118.3.137 6 161 ms 159 ms 160 ms 61.8.232.61 7 161 ms 160 ms 140 ms ge-0-0-0.r00.sngpsi01.sg.bb.verio.net [61.8.234.61] 8 342 ms 380 ms 360 ms p1-0-1-2.r81.mlpsca01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.4.149] 9 341 ms 380 ms 360 ms p16-1-1-0.r20.mlpsca01.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.2.247] 10 342 ms 380 ms 360 ms p64-0-0-0.r21.snjsca04.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.5.3] 11 342 ms 380 ms 360 ms p16-3-0-0.r01.snjsca04.us.bb.verio.net [129.250.2.183] 12 342 ms 360 ms 360 ms equinixexchange.ir1.sanjose-ca.us.xo.net [206.223.116.85] 13 321 ms 380 ms 360 ms p4-2-0.RAR2.SanJose-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.5.185] 14 321 ms 361 ms 360 ms p0-0-0.MAR2.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.5.138] 15 323 ms 360 ms 360 ms p15-0.CHR1.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [207.88.80.182] 16 * 67.104.60.222.ptr.us.xo.net [67.104.60.222] reports: Destinationhost unreachable. Trace complete.
Posted by adamp, 03-18-2004, 10:06 PM
Seems to be XO that's the problem. The managed.com site is loading, but going via Layer42
Posted by mcraft, 03-18-2004, 10:41 PM
I have 2 servers with managed one is up, the other still unaccessible. I wonder when will they sort out everything and maintain decent connectivity with little down time. The many reports of down time here in WHT is not going to be good for their business. I hope this is just minor hiccups while switching to xo. I can't be forgiving and hurt my own business.
Posted by xAngelx, 03-18-2004, 11:04 PM
Well I've only checked around 25 of ours and all of them are up and pinging normally.
Posted by adamp, 03-18-2004, 11:08 PM
Are any on the XO line?
Posted by xAngelx, 03-18-2004, 11:27 PM
5 are on the XO line, including the two I'm just setting up right now and it's humming along nicely. Getting approx 80 ms pings from Toronto Canada.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-18-2004, 11:28 PM
Is say you have a server crash then adamp
Posted by Joshua, 03-18-2004, 11:33 PM
I hate to say this, but I haven't seen any other AboveNet issues in the San Jose area, and there are issues on the XO line right now, not sure what that has to do with AboveNet's equipment. I'm getting destination unreachable errors for servers on the XO line: Also, their AboveNet lines look perfectly fine for a provider who claims that their issue is with AboveNet. Managed.com has 2 connections to Assertive Networks as far as I can tell, who purchase bandwidth from AboveNet. They don't have any direct AboveNet connections. This is either a direct issue with XO or with Managed.com - Donna, if they're blaming this on AboveNet, they're lying to you, plain and simple. -Josh Last edited by Joshua; 03-18-2004 at 11:39 PM.
Posted by mcraft, 03-18-2004, 11:44 PM
Now both servers are out .....
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-18-2004, 11:45 PM
All my servers are still fine
Posted by elitehst, 03-18-2004, 11:52 PM
mine are down...
Posted by adamp, 03-18-2004, 11:55 PM
I doubt my server's crashed with a number of other people seeing the connection die at the same point on XO
Posted by ChoirBoy, 03-18-2004, 11:56 PM
first they're up, now they're down, then up again sheesh ... okay, we're not paying top dollar, but you would think they could keep from kicking the connection out of the wall socket.
Posted by xAngelx, 03-19-2004, 12:05 AM
They have to take it down a bit each night to add more IP blocks to it to accomodate the next days orders. Due to all the problems on the abovenet line (again out of their hands) they are trying to get the new servers on XO. But with the way the network is now they have to shut down the XO router (which my servers on there are down atm too) add the IP blocks, reconfigure and then boot it up again. It should be back soon. This is what they have the other cisco router coming on Monday for, to make all the changes to that and then stick it in front of all the lines to direct traffic. They wanted to do it all at once but with all the people (including myself) bitching at them about abovenet they added XO a little early.
Posted by ChoirBoy, 03-19-2004, 12:13 AM
It would have been nice to have had some warning.
Posted by adamp, 03-19-2004, 12:17 AM
Indeed, my server's been unavailable for 2-3 hours now with no warning from Managed. Surely it's not hard to send out a quick email saying servers will be down during a set time period :/
Posted by mcraft, 03-19-2004, 12:24 AM
Yeah man! At least a warning on their web site or email. None of my support email from a few days ago are answered. I don't wish to bash, I don't think this is the way to solve the problem. Some information or pre-warning on the web site would help us calm down, knowing that they are working to improve.
Posted by xAngelx, 03-19-2004, 12:30 AM
Well they haven't been down for two or 3 hours, I'm at the 20 minute mark (average is 30 minutes for it). Agreed they should send out a little warning email (already emailed them to blast them about the timing as I was in the middle of a cpanel install lol). The abovenet ones are all up atm, just the XO ones down. Josh, nobody is lying to me, I'm basing my statements on the facts I get out of the owners combined with experience (had servers there for almost 7 months now) combined with actual data from all of our servers there (a considerable #). Layer42, Abovenet and Assertive are ALL actually abovenet. The lines run into the original DC across the street from where managed are and then from there to the second DC. The problem is a conflict between Abovenet routers and Assertive Networks routers that nobody has been able to pinpoint so far. And going over my own traceroutes from when there have been problems it's clear the problem is starting in the first DC before the line gets to the one managed.com is located in. It's random as to how often and how big a problem it causes. It does cause slightly higher ping times than there should be (about a 30 ms difference) day and night, but normally that goes unnoticed until something either spirals out of control or abovenet/managed.com themselves get DoS'd. Then all hell breaks lose. Managed cannot do a thing about fixing that which is why they brought in a direct XO line. They want to fix the problem as much as anyone but the abovenet/assertive issue is beyond their control and apparently beyond the scope of abovenet and assertive's staff to trouble shoot right now. Something just goes haywire between the two routers. By bringing in XO they are hoping to be able to better handle these issues in future by shunting traffic to XO if abovenet goes down or lags out (abovenet will still be the main line). They just need that router in front of the lines to direct the traffic but with all the complaints and fussing they added XO sooner (before the last router got there) so atm to get more blocks on the XO router they have to reconfigure it manually as it was never intended to be setup quite this way.
Posted by friendzone, 03-19-2004, 12:33 AM
my server down again!! What the.
Posted by mcraft, 03-19-2004, 12:37 AM
My servers are still out of reach since I reported about 3 hours ago. Though one of them was up for about 1 hour and it went out again. So is my luck that we happen to be on the router they are working on. Or are they?
Posted by mcraft, 03-19-2004, 01:09 AM
My servers are back...... hope is for good.......
Posted by friendzone, 03-19-2004, 01:13 AM
My server is back, Managed.com
Posted by jasonl813, 03-19-2004, 04:17 PM
Dear Valued Customer, It has just been brought to our attention that we have exceed the capacity of one of our edge routers while bringing up the XO line. Our engineering staff will be devoted to this issue throughout the weekend. We will be adding new hardware this weekend to aid in this effort and we will try to minimize any possible impacts of this work. We sincerely apologize for any inconveniences due to this matter. Best Regards, Managed.com
Posted by xAngelx, 03-19-2004, 04:33 PM
Yep, that's part of the problem with the XO line. The router that was scheduled to be delivered Monday is probably going to arrive sooner. Manged.com want to resolve things ASAP so they are sending someone down to wherever the router currently is to pick it up and bring it back so they can fix it this weekend instead of waiting till Monday.
Posted by joshiee, 03-20-2004, 10:07 PM
Well.. thats great to know
Posted by LZHost, 03-21-2004, 04:11 AM
Well at first I thought it might have been my box but I checked other people hosted on it. Ran a traceroute and then I realized even the main site managed.com is offline. This is a pretty serious outage hopefully it won't last long.
Posted by simonhouse, 03-21-2004, 04:12 AM
Its probably the new router going in, as some of us were advised a couple of days ago. Let's see how quick they can push this one in ? Unreachable from here for 19 minutes and counting...
Posted by MadKraze, 03-21-2004, 04:12 AM
are all servers fully down or just my server? 3:12 am Est
Posted by SecureAX, 03-21-2004, 04:13 AM
Hi there, They are carrying out some maintenance work on the weekends. Thanks.
Posted by ChoirBoy, 03-21-2004, 04:15 AM
Yup, I've been up and down all week. I even received the following response to a Wednesday tech.support inquery ... Friday: I suspect their spending the weekend trying to resolve this, while we lose customers on our servers. Which in turn will result in them losing customers leasing their servers.
Posted by LZHost, 03-21-2004, 04:15 AM
MadKraze: This is a different situation I think. EVERY server with managed.com Is down and email support is unavailable.
Posted by LZHost, 03-21-2004, 04:18 AM
hmm thanks... the clock really ticks faster when your waiting for your servers to start responding again.
Posted by simonhouse, 03-21-2004, 04:22 AM
Back up via Layer42. EDIT: Up and down. Last edited by simonhouse; 03-21-2004 at 04:26 AM.
Posted by MadKraze, 03-21-2004, 04:23 AM
Mine is back up, hopefully everything is okay now edit: spoke too soon getting packet loss
Posted by xAngelx, 03-21-2004, 04:24 AM
Ok what part of my last post (about 3 up from here) did y'all miss? They are installing another router etc this weekend in order to try and fix the network problems etc. My servers are down too but given that it's after 3AM and traffic is at it's lowest it's the best time for it atm. Better than doing it in the middle of the day
Posted by barry wu, 03-21-2004, 04:35 AM
SERVER DOWN in UK Unreachable 34mins ,,,,, continue ,,,,,,,,,,,, hope up soon
Posted by McZ, 03-21-2004, 05:08 AM
mines still down! It pings with 25% packet loss but i cant access SSH or WHM
Posted by e-infinity, 03-21-2004, 05:09 AM
Ping: yes (33 average from BC, Canada) TCP: No UDP: No
Posted by ChoirBoy, 03-21-2004, 05:26 AM
Been down all night. This is getting tiresome.
Posted by dnh, 03-21-2004, 05:33 AM
Anyone on manage.com and notice they have been having allot of downage? Appearing to be an unreliable network for dedicated servers. Looks like they got's some big problems if the whole network goes down.
Posted by ChrisOh, 03-21-2004, 05:34 AM
Yes This is hurting my business.
Posted by hostbox, 03-21-2004, 05:36 AM
You get what you paid for I always wanted to say that
Posted by yaax, 03-21-2004, 05:40 AM
It is up now!
Posted by dnh, 03-21-2004, 05:41 AM
Well aleast it's not one of those 59.00 servers..
Posted by e-infinity, 03-21-2004, 05:44 AM
Only thing is, Packet loss, arghhhhh! UDP game servers require 0 packet loss
Posted by hostbox, 03-21-2004, 05:46 AM
They're one of the $55
Posted by e-infinity, 03-21-2004, 05:59 AM
Mine is 279.00 x 2
Posted by yaax, 03-21-2004, 06:01 AM
Ok, down again, seems like they are testing configure their new XO router - since it have packet loss and traffic is going thorugh XO now. Up and down now every minute.
Posted by Imago, 03-21-2004, 06:05 AM
I wish managed.com prove their business model successful and reduce the downtime to the expected minimum! No matter where are our own servers, we should feel sympathy with those who are on managed.com. Because indirectly, their being there is working towards the reduction of our own monthly fees.
Posted by ToaD, 03-21-2004, 06:20 AM
can't ping their website or any servers there no i dont use them, no i havent contacted them first, yes i use one of them sites that are dedicated there. woot
Posted by Drache, 03-21-2004, 06:21 AM
Anyone know when managed.com will be back up?
Posted by a-m, 03-21-2004, 06:22 AM
this is the 3rd time this weekend alone that my server has gone down. 66.79.161.* i have been with managed.com since november of 2003. i love the speeds, but the downtime is killing me. i dont use this server for business, of ANY SORT. i use it to test scripts on. i was in the middle of a ssh session writing some script & it disconnects. i mean COME ON..... errrr
Posted by Maccar, 03-21-2004, 06:22 AM
Well, I think we'll be giving these guys one more chance and if we get too much downtime over the next month then it's time to go. I have experienced much worse than this but still it's a nuisance. Still down in UK
Posted by PhoneSupport, 03-21-2004, 06:23 AM
And again, why dont they inform us through Email so we can warn our clients. What exactly can I say "Sorry, Server is down, and we dont know why. It should be up whenever. Hold on its up, oh hang on its down again, wait its back, oh its gone.". I have said it many times and get nothing from managed.
Posted by hostbox, 03-21-2004, 06:24 AM
Can we keep the "Managed is Down oh @~#$%" threats on one alone? Be a good member
Posted by OZOL, 03-21-2004, 06:28 AM
Hello, My server is DOWN too!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Managed.com is very unstable company....
Posted by Doggy, 03-21-2004, 06:30 AM
All my servers are down :\ But I have received a mail regarding this downtime
Posted by Maccar, 03-21-2004, 06:30 AM
Yep webspace - that has to be the number one consideration of any backbone provider surely ? If I was renting servers out I would make sure that I told my clients exactly what was going on. Hmmmmm....the clock is ticking.
Posted by mzg_z, 03-21-2004, 06:37 AM
My trace to Managed.com changued from AboveNET to XO Communications. Is managed.com updating their lines?
Posted by e-infinity, 03-21-2004, 06:43 AM
Should I call them @ 3 in the morning asking what the hell is going on, sounding like an original serial killer ?
Posted by Maccar, 03-21-2004, 08:07 AM
Everything seems to be back up for me and it's lightning fast now
Posted by mcraft, 03-21-2004, 08:27 AM
Yap mine too! Hope the work is done, a stable line from now on.
Posted by LZHost, 03-21-2004, 01:45 PM
up for me now too and everything appears to be running perfectly smooth.
Posted by jasonl813, 03-21-2004, 01:48 PM
Ditto on both servers I have with them.
Posted by xAngelx, 03-21-2004, 01:55 PM
Boy if people read even half my posts in this thread (particularly the ones a couple pages back) they'd have a clue as to what's going on... hell I've been posting the info in this thread all week about what the problems are and how they are working to fix them. So in summary of my posts this week I submit the following in the hopes some of you will actually read it: #1 Managed did send out notice on Thursday and Friday that they would be working on the network this weekend (and timed last nights interruption for the middle of the night when traffic was at it's lowest). #2 The problem isn't managed.com's network, it's the connection between abovenet and assertive networks and abovenet can't figure it out (hence the addition of XO). #3 They added XO before they were completely ready for it because we all demanded they do something (I know I've been yelling at them for weeks about it). But they needed another router to direct the traffic. #4 They drove all the way to wherever the router was to pick it up yesterday instead of waiting for it to be shipped to them Monday #5 They are configuring the network and installing the new router in front of the XO and abovenet lines to direct traffic etc and hopefully get around the abovenet problem #6 Bottom line is they are working to do whatever they can to solve the problems. That's why they brought in XO (despite being in an Abovenet DC).
Posted by ericabiz, 03-21-2004, 02:59 PM
Hi Donna, You do not have a complete understanding of the situation. Managed.com brought in XO because XO is cheaper than AboveNet. They couldn't get AboveNet to come down on price (they're paying list), so they picked a different provider and routed traffic through XO as a high priority (even though XO often has higher ping times and worse routing than AboveNet.) Managed.com is NOT in an AboveNet datacenter. They are in a former AboveNet datacenter that AboveNet still has fiber to. Right. The problem is never with Managed.com, right? It's always with their providers. I hear excuses, excuses, and more excuses on this thread. The fact is that Managed.com cannot manage a network, and that fact is proven by repeated downtimes. Adding XO will not help. They could add Internap and it wouldn't help. They could push 100% of their traffic through Internap and it still wouldn't help. I don't mean to be rude, but those of you who are deluded into thinking that adding more bandwidth will solve their problems need to get a reality check. We will see more downtime from Managed.com in the future. I would say they will be hard-pressed to meet 99.9% network uptime over the coming months.
Posted by RackRhino, 03-21-2004, 03:31 PM
Erica pretty much said it how it is, MGS needs to do alot more than just add XO to there network, they also need to take some of that money that there making in employee some technical support operators, and maybe a live chat service, they have good prices, and some good systems but i just use them for personal use, i wont use them for business till they get everything straight. MGS will edventually be a good service, all around but right now there still rather new, and need to explore more options instead of standing still. Well nicely said erica goodday CheerS
Posted by DTMark, 03-21-2004, 03:42 PM
Might this have anything to do with this problem: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...hreadid=250577
Posted by PhoneSupport, 03-21-2004, 04:30 PM
xAnglex. When exactly did we personally get notified, because I got no email about it. Nor did many other people who have managed servers. Regards, James
Posted by xAngelx, 03-21-2004, 07:26 PM
I got an email from them on Thursday night (around midnight) that they would be working on the network this weekend. And Erica... I'm not an idiot who blindly repeats what she's told. I've had 6 months of evaluating their network and problems as well as numerous discussions with steve about all their issues, from network to support. In the beginning they had problems running the network, now they are working on fixing them and XO may be cheaper but it provides lower ping time from here than abovenet ever did. I don't care how much they pay for it, only that it works, and after their fiddling so far this weekend it works quite nicely. And they have plans to improve it even more (as well as their support) so in future we'll see the network get better as opposed to worse. I've enough data from all our servers there for the last six months to figure out where the problem is without them telling me. The question I posed to them was what are they going to do to fix it (not that I have the most pull there but I told them point blank, fix the network or I yank all our server clients out of there and move them to our Texas location in The Planet) I'm sure many other people told them the same thing. So they have put together a plan to improve things and get around the abovenet problem while they continue to build and improve the network. Believe what I've said or wait to see the proof on your own, I don't care... the only business I care about is my own. But I thought I'd be nice enough to pass on to you all what I do know about what's going on there. I could care less if anyone actually believes it (heck, half of you posting in this thread have never even had servers there and shouldn't even be commenting on them). Time will tell what happens there, but my clients there have seen the steady improvement in the last couple of months and are happy enough atm.
Posted by ericabiz, 03-22-2004, 07:38 AM
Donna, you are not getting it. There is no "AboveNet problem." There is simply Managed.com's inability to run a network... and the fact that they picked up XO 20% cheaper than they could AboveNet. Point-blank: If you care about your business, and presumably your customers, why would you put your paying customers on an unproven network with severe uptime issues instead of just picking a more reliable provider?
Posted by jasonl813, 03-22-2004, 10:21 AM
I will say the speeds have definately improved. My remote backup that ran at 200kbps through AboveNet screamed along at 12mbps through XO. I don't care what bandwidth provider they use or who is to blame for what. All I care about is that they fixed it.
Posted by mcraft, 03-22-2004, 11:26 AM
I will continue with managed as long as they are doing something to improve. I ping and tracert from Singapore to most US DC, I get > 15 hops and > 220ms. To managed I get 12 hops and < 190ms. I don't know what they did right, their network to SG is the fastest. Good price, good speed and as long as they keep the line up, I will stick around till I find another provider that could better managed in price and speed (& of course stable line).
Posted by xAngelx, 03-22-2004, 01:17 PM
No Erica you aren't gettting it, I have a lot of servers there and have a lot of data to go over from the network (6 months worth). The biggest problem in the last couple of months starts at abovenet before it ever gets to managed.com. I've been over this with everyone from Managed to Abovenet themselves, nobody (including abovenet) can figure out what is causing the loss between two specific routers going into managed.com Reserve further comment on this till you have at least 30-50 servers and 6 months worth of data to actually base your opinion on. Manged.com aren't the best network guys around but they are competent enough to fix most things. This is beyond them and abovenet so XO was brought is to take the brunt of traffic for now (and yes it helps that it's 20% cheaper). Because their "issues" aren't as bad as you and some people make them out to be. Downtime from January till the middle of this month was practically nothing, a couple minutes lag here and there. My clients know what they are getting into when they sign up. They also know if they want the best uptime they should pay the extra to get one of our servers in Texas instead. Managed.com is a pretty decent place and getting better. My clients there are happy too. Matter of fact some of the "pro managed" posts in this thread have been made by my very own clients with servers there.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-22-2004, 02:58 PM
Dont worry about it Donna, certain people would bash Managed.com even if they had solid 100% network uptime for the last 6 months and speeds of 10mbit off each server as well as top level support. Its just the usual "anti managed.com clan", no point responding to them anymore as they will never learn and continue to diss a service they have never used, even though it has no real gain to them personally. Some people have way too much time on their hands
Posted by khakane, 03-22-2004, 03:50 PM
i hate to jump on the bandwagon of people who are totally displaeased with managed.com, but i mean come on... yes its nice that they are adding more bandwidth from XO, but they have been trying to install this line since AT LEAST Feb 12, 2004. seeing as its March 22, this is a pretty scarey number. To dig a little deeper into the story, instead of buying different, not as reliable bandwidth, why not try to fix the bandwidth you already have. It seems that managed's answer in this case is "throw some money at it". Adding new routers and new lines wont help a failing network, try replacing routers and dealing with what you have first. I have been a managed customer for many months with multiple servers, and i think in the last 6 months the majority of email i send and recieve now is to manged bitching about network connectivity and bad pings. To go even further into it, i am quite positive that i have been under the 99.5% uptime that they promise, and have gotten nothing in return, not even an acknowledgement from them that i fell below the uptime percentage. I honestly dont care one way or the other if its managed's fault or abovenet or XO. When it comes down to it, the problem is 100% reflected upon managed.com. Maybe ServerMatrix should have a no-signup fee special for people who are leaving managed to host at SM... I know i would do it as soon as they waved the signup fee.... Just my 2 cents
Posted by xAngelx, 03-22-2004, 04:08 PM
khakane read my posts, this is beyond managed.com. It's a direct problem between An abovenet router and an assertive router going into managed.com (before the managed network). The routers have been replaced several times, nothing has fixed it and abovenet has simply decided they can't find the problem so they gave up looking for it. Managed's answer to that was basically "screw abovenet then". That's why XO was brought in. The delay in installing it wasn't their fault either. They had to wait on XO to run lines to them then provide them with the equipment they needed to activate it (which happened last week) and then a router to direct traffic (which was installed this weekend). Traffic along XO is running smoothly and is faster than the abovenet line. Their uptime promise does not cover you in this case, the problem isn't "their" network, it's abovenet's and therefore beyond their control. They are now moving to get rid of abovenet altogether (or reduce it to an emergency backup line only). Managed is doing their best to get away from the problem but it takes time and money to do it.
Posted by khakane, 03-22-2004, 04:18 PM
From support@managed.com Subject {100-21082} RE: pings Date Thu, February 12, 2004 7:24 am Dear Valued Customer, We sincerely apologize for the recent network downtime you may have experienced. This was due to an erroneous network configuration while in our attempts to expand our bandwidth with XO Communications. After about forty minutes of failed attempts, we decided to postpone our bandwidth expansion until XO supplies us with the correct information. During those forty minutes, your server may have experienced packet-loss or downtime. Again, we extend our apologies for any inconveniences due to this matter. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ well it would appear you failed to notice how i said they had been trying to install XO since early feb, but thats ok. why would they try to install a line from somewhere with no hardware/setup configuration information?? hi, when there is no traceroute (for at least 3 hours from what can be read on the forums, even w/o owning a server there) i would call that downtime which I quote from their SLA maybe i read that a little different than you did, but i consider 3 hours of downtime to fall under that clause.. but whatever, like i said im not here to flame managed.com, im just upset with how they handle things.
Posted by RackRhino, 03-22-2004, 05:11 PM
I think the free 100GB is total bs, sorry for the phrase but i mean majiorty of the users dont even use most of the bandwidth, i mean its just...."hey we messed up, so we wanna give you somthing you wont use to make up for it", i dont think its proper, but thats how the boat floats, maybe somtime we will get a discount month?
Posted by khakane, 03-22-2004, 05:19 PM
yea, and maybe one month it might work right.....
Posted by simonhouse, 03-22-2004, 05:34 PM
I'm still sitting on the fence regarding Managed.com, not knowing whether to stay or leave. Prior to 13th/14th March, their network was extremely fast, but now I'm lucky if I get more than 20kB/s from some addresses on my box [and from Managed's own webserver]. Often I find myself ready to click the 'order' button on alternative provider's websites, but I keep stopping myself wondering if Managed.com will ever get their shi[p|t] in order. I guess I can only hope for so long.
Posted by ericabiz, 03-22-2004, 08:09 PM
Hi Donna, We own (not lease) over 60 servers. All are colocated at AboveNet's SJC3 datacenter in San Jose. Being a direct customer of AboveNet, I have access not only to their technical and sales staff, but also to their outage notification board. I have: a) Experienced no total network outages in the 11 months we have been with AboveNet; b) Read the outage board and have seen no indication of specific outages within the AboveNet network which would affect Managed.com's servers. Frankly, I'm sick of an excellent (100% uptime) network provider being dragged through the mud by a bottom-of-the-barrel dedicated server company. I have seen absolutely no indication that these network problems are caused by anything other than denial-of-service attacks (which AboveNet has a service to prevent that Managed.com is refusing to pay for) and Managed.com's own incompetency. From some locations (certainly not from my house). It also appears that Managed.com is throttling specific IPs on their network to restrict traffic to and from those IPs. They have more bandwidth now than they did with AboveNet because they didn't want to pay AboveNet's prices for bandwidth, so that's helping matters, as well. The question is not if Managed.com will have more downtime. The question is when. They have still not shown proof that they are capable of managing a network, and XO is even worse about blocking DDoS attacks than AboveNet is. They're going to get attacked again and go down. It's just a matter of time. I still don't understand why your company would want to put up with this. Aren't you sick of answering your customers' questions about slow performance and downtime?
Posted by drhonk, 03-22-2004, 09:10 PM
I think the problem is with the way they manage their network. Get rid of AboveNet altogether will bring them down to one uplink only ... AGAIN. If they really do that, that's a poor judgement on managed.com's part imho.
Posted by Navweb, 03-22-2004, 09:56 PM
anyone got managed.com as a downer now? my sites are all dead. Paul.
Posted by xAngelx, 03-22-2004, 10:05 PM
All our servers are up. And I'm not going to debate what I can see quite clearly in all my traceroutes, which is problems with abovenet at that particular location, before it gets to managed. I've had problems with abovenet before, I'd hardly call them a 100% uptime provider. Yes it's more noticable when there is a DOS attack and yes there is still more network work on tap to be done. Bottom line Erica is you shouldn't be posting here at all, you have no servers there and technically you're breaking forum rules by even posting about them (I believe there's a rule about having experience with a company before posting). You do not, therefore you have no accurate opinion to state about manged.com. As I said, there's actually been very little trouble there and all clients there know there's the odd chance of an outage but they also see the improvements. They're all happy and that's what matters. If any decide they don't like it there we cut them a deal on a Texas server that they can live with (a few have moved over but mostly in the early days last year when the problems were worse). Time will tell, and in the end I'll be proven right, just wait and watch
Posted by mostaman, 03-22-2004, 11:33 PM
My server is down too
Posted by xAngelx, 03-22-2004, 11:48 PM
Might want to submit a reboot request, all of our servers (on both XO and Abovenet) are up. Although the abovenet ones have a tiny hint of lag atm
Posted by mostaman, 03-22-2004, 11:59 PM
I did submit a ticket! ping from the UK: Pinging 66.79.183.XXX with 32 bytes of data: Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Ping statistics for 66.79.183.XXX: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss), Ping from USA: Pinging 66.79.183.XXX [66.79.183.XXX]: Ping #1: * [No response] Ping #2: * [No response] Ping #3: * [No response] Ping #4: * [No response] Done pinging 66.79.183.XXX!
Posted by mcraft, 03-22-2004, 11:59 PM
Mine are up.
Posted by mostaman, 03-23-2004, 12:05 AM
These two results appeared while pinging from USA >> IP address is nothing to do whith my server << Ping #1: * [No response] Ping #2: * [No response] Ping #3: Got reply from 66.79.173.87 in 577ms [TTL=52] Ping #4: Got reply from 66.79.173.87 in 68ms [TTL=52] and Ping #1: Got reply from 195.147.88.133 in 814ms [TTL=111] Ping #2: Got reply from 195.147.88.133 in 163ms [TTL=111] Ping #3: Got reply from 195.147.88.133 in 162ms [TTL=111] Ping #4: Got reply from 195.147.88.133 in 133ms [TTL=111] I was pinging my sedrver's IP and yet those foreign IPs appeared in the result!
Posted by simonhouse, 03-23-2004, 12:09 AM
I posed the question to Managed.com regarding the status of their connections, I didn't get as full an answer as I would have liked, but for those interested, it is pasted below. They still won't tell me why some of my IP addresses are throttled, so I'll have to keep raising tickets until they do.
Posted by jasonl813, 03-23-2004, 01:12 AM
This announcement did not come from managed.com, but I thought it would be good to point this AboveNet announcement out before Managed.com gets blamed for maintenance not on their data center network. Dear Valued Customer, Please take note that AboveNet will be performing the following maintenance: ***Date*** March 25th and 26th, 2004 ***Site(s) Affected*** dca2 2100 M Street NW washington dc iad1 8100 Boone Blvd vienna, va sjc3 1735 lunday ave san jose ca ***Time*** Maintenance Window (2:00am - 4:00am local time) ***Duration*** 60 minutes each router ***Type*** preventive Hardware replacement and Software Upgrade. ***Details*** Over the course of 2 nights, we will be proactively replacing Several cards on the following routers: cr1.dca2.us.above.net cr2.dca2.us.above.net cr1.iad1.us.above.net cr1.sjc3.us.above.net We will also be upgrading the software at the same time.
Posted by ericabiz, 03-23-2004, 02:58 AM
Hi Jason, SJC3 is the datacenter we are in. It is not where Managed.com is. This isn't an outage notification, either; AboveNet has backup routers on all of their routes. Again, in the 11 months we have been at AboveNet, we have had no network outages whatsoever here in San Jose. There was one outage that caused traffic to be slow for a few hours between us and Europe; that was resolved on the same day. That is the only thing I can point to as any semblance of a "network outage" at AboveNet. -Erica
Posted by mostaman, 03-23-2004, 06:34 AM
well, can some one explain to me why me server is down for 9 hours+ and when is it likely to comeback to life and what sort of compensation would be offered to me?
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-23-2004, 07:04 AM
Because you have crashed it maybe??? All managed.com servers running 100% fine here, as usual My main website is currently on one, if you don't believe me
Posted by mostaman, 03-23-2004, 07:43 AM
Sash!, ARE YOU SPEAKING FOR MANAGED? if yes, tell me about this then: 66.79.183.130 a ticket was submitted 10 hours ago, crashed or not, I never got a reply ! if not, Please do not speak of that which you know not. Thank you.
Posted by khakane, 03-23-2004, 12:00 PM
sigh
Posted by friendzone, 03-23-2004, 12:13 PM
haha, i am kind of lucky, coz i change a new hosting company last week. I used managed.com for 3 weeks, but i could not access my server too often, and all my clients yelled to me. Scare me stay away from them. Anyway, I can still access managed.com and my server. 1 19 ms 9 ms 9 ms 64.230.254.112 2 9 ms 8 ms 9 ms 64.230.229.81 3 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms core4-toronto63-Gigabite4-1.in.bellnexxia.net [2 06.108.107.181] 4 26 ms 27 ms 19 ms core1-chicago23-pos0-0.in.bellnexxia.net [206.10 8.103.130] 5 27 ms 19 ms 19 ms bx1-chicago23-pos10-0.in.bellnexxia.net [206.108 .103.142] 6 39 ms 39 ms 39 ms p5-2.IR1.Chicago2-IL.us.xo.net [207.88.50.173] 7 39 ms 39 ms 39 ms p5-0-0.RAR1.Chicago-IL.us.xo.net [65.106.6.133] 8 69 ms 69 ms 69 ms p6-0-0.RAR2.Denver-CO.us.xo.net [65.106.0.25] 9 69 ms 69 ms 69 ms p0-0-0-1.RAR1.Denver-CO.us.xo.net [65.106.1.77] 10 99 ms 99 ms 99 ms p6-0-0.RAR1.SanJose-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.0.21] 11 99 ms 149 ms 99 ms p0-0-0.MAR1.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.5.134] 12 99 ms 99 ms 99 ms p0-0.CHR1.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [207.88.80.178] 13 79 ms 79 ms 99 ms 67.104.60.222.ptr.us.xo.net [67.104.60.222] 14 79 ms 79 ms 79 ms www.managed.com [66.79.160.10] Trace complete.
Posted by WirralNet Matt, 03-23-2004, 03:06 PM
I know the network wasnt down. I know because I have servers routing via both Above Net and XO. I can also route them via Layer42 fine by using my cable connection. So yes, I do know. If you cant manage a server properly, please dont blame the network. If the network had been down for 9 hours, im pretty sure there would be very few managed.com customers left
Posted by mcraft, 03-24-2004, 03:05 AM
Maintenance Schedule now updated on Managed.com web site!
Posted by simonhouse, 03-24-2004, 03:41 AM
I noticed that too! It must be Christmas Seriously, I hope this is the beginning of change - M.com sorted out their IP throttling issues, so my satisfaction level is starting to rise again! As a side note, I'm thinking their maintenance warning might be meaning March 24th instead of 23rd, since I had 100% uptime on the 23rd.
Posted by mostaman, 03-24-2004, 07:27 AM
Sash! please have a look at thos ping results while server was down (some are done from UK and some from USA): May be the network was not down, but for sure there was some issues with it as no changes were carried out on my server's conf lately. Normal result: Pinging 66.79.183.130 [66.79.183.130]: Ping #1: * [No response] Ping #2: * [No response] Ping #3: * [No response] Ping #4: * [No response] Done pinging 66.79.183.130! Weird Results (notice the IP Pinged and the IPs in result) Pinging 66.79.183.130 [66.79.183.130]: Ping #1: * [No response] Ping #2: Got reply from 216.194.27.1 in 783ms [TTL=240] Ping #3: Got reply from 216.194.27.1 in 40ms [TTL=240] Ping #4: Got reply from 216.194.27.1 in 43ms [TTL=240] Done pinging 66.79.183.130! Pinging 66.79.183.130 [66.79.183.130]: Ping #1: Got reply from 213.96.195.57 in 754ms [TTL=49] Ping #2: Got reply from 213.96.195.57 in 180ms [TTL=49] Ping #3: Got reply from 213.96.195.57 in 177ms [TTL=49] Ping #4: Got reply from 213.96.195.57 in 177ms [TTL=49] Done pinging 66.79.183.130! Pinging 66.79.183.130 [66.79.183.130]: Ping #1: Got reply from 64.82.11.11 in 47ms [TTL=109] Ping #2: Got reply from 64.82.11.11 in 52ms [TTL=109] Ping #3: Got reply from 64.82.11.11 in 52ms [TTL=109] Ping #4: Got reply from 64.82.11.11 in 52ms [TTL=109] Done pinging 66.79.183.130! Pinging 66.79.183.130 [66.79.183.130]: Ping #1: * [No response] Ping #2: * [No response] Ping #3: Got reply from 66.79.173.87 in 577ms [TTL=52] Ping #4: Got reply from 66.79.173.87 in 68ms [TTL=52] Done pinging 66.79.183.130! Pinging 66.79.183.130 [66.79.183.130]: Ping #1: Got reply from 195.147.88.133 in 814ms [TTL=111] Ping #2: Got reply from 195.147.88.133 in 163ms [TTL=111] Ping #3: Got reply from 195.147.88.133 in 162ms [TTL=111] Ping #4: Got reply from 195.147.88.133 in 133ms [TTL=111] Done pinging 66.79.183.130!
Posted by mcraft, 03-24-2004, 11:27 AM
Your IP seems ok. Ping results from Singapore. C:\>ping 66.79.183.130 Pinging 66.79.183.130 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 66.79.183.130: bytes=32 time=182ms TTL=51 Reply from 66.79.183.130: bytes=32 time=185ms TTL=51 Reply from 66.79.183.130: bytes=32 time=185ms TTL=51 Reply from 66.79.183.130: bytes=32 time=168ms TTL=51 Ping statistics for 66.79.183.130: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 168ms, Maximum = 185ms, Average = 180ms
Posted by mcraft, 03-24-2004, 11:31 AM
Ignore the time, I am using dialup to do the tracert, my DSL router does not allow tracert. The trace from SG is pretty good too. C:\>tracert 66.79.183.130 Tracing route to 66-79-183-130-user.managed.com [66.79.183.130] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 132 ms 119 ms 119 ms hs33.singnet.com.sg [165.21.224.6] 2 120 ms 119 ms 120 ms 165.21.100.43 3 120 ms 119 ms 119 ms GE-1-1-0.bedok.singnet.com.sg [165.21.12.1] 4 120 ms 119 ms 119 ms POS2-0.tp-core1.ix.singtel.com [202.160.250.53] 5 320 ms 320 ms 320 ms 203.208.182.114 6 320 ms 300 ms 299 ms 203.208.168.114 7 300 ms 320 ms 299 ms fe9-6.IR1.PaloAlto-CA.us.xo.net [207.88.240.9] 8 300 ms 300 ms 300 ms p5-2-0.RAR2.SanJose-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.5.177] 9 320 ms 300 ms 300 ms p0-0-0.MAR2.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [65.106.5.138] 10 300 ms 300 ms 300 ms p15-0.CHR1.Fremont-CA.us.xo.net [207.88.80.182] 11 320 ms 300 ms 320 ms 67.104.60.222.ptr.us.xo.net [67.104.60.222] 12 300 ms 299 ms 300 ms 66-79-183-130-user.managed.com [66.79.183.130] Trace complete.