Shared Hosting
Shared HostingKnowledgebase
Portal Home > Knowledgebase > Industry Announcements > Web Hosting Main Forums > Providers and Network Outages and Updates > Burst.net post migration outage
Burst.net post migration outage
 |
 |
 |
Posted by HostcrateCEO, 09-06-2013, 02:03 AM Three servers that were migrated over to the Dunmore Facility with Burst have just went down three times in the past few hours. Is anyone else experiencing this issue?
I have of course submitted a ticket to find out what is going on. I just wanted to know if anyone else was having the same issue.
Posted by nkawit, 09-06-2013, 03:03 AM Same problem here.
Btw, in future give the thread a better subject.
Posted by gingir, 09-06-2013, 03:30 AM this burst.net migration really looks like a bloodshed on this forum, threads everywhere...
hopefully they will soon get back to their previous quality standard?
Posted by HostcrateCEO, 09-06-2013, 03:37 AM Hopefully nothing serious is wrong as they were down approximately 30 minutes. No reply from Burst as of this posting via the support ticket. Sorry about that. I was in a bit of a rush to check to see if people were having the same issue because clients were concerned.Quote:
Btw, in future give the thread a better subject.
Posted by veedub, 09-06-2013, 04:48 AM
I have of course submitted a ticket to find out what is going on. I just wanted to know if anyone else was having the same issue.
Posted by HostcrateCEO, 09-06-2013, 04:57 AM
It has been over 2 hours with no response.
Posted by veedub, 09-06-2013, 04:59 AM
It has been over 2 hours with no response.
Posted by HostcrateCEO, 09-06-2013, 05:11 AM
My last ticket was Posted on: 31 August 2013 11:15 PM and answered Posted on: 01 September 2013 12:14 AM so it didn't take them as long as it is now.
The servers are back up. But I would still, of course, like to know what happened to make them all go down that many times within a few hours.
Posted by Loon, 09-06-2013, 07:33 AM Title updated.
I'm not sure if this is the same migration that's being discussed here? I'll come back and merge the threads if it is.
Posted by MacGenius Hosting, 09-06-2013, 07:50 AM Mine went down too - twice in 2 hours.
Posted by HostcrateCEO, 09-06-2013, 08:08 AM
I'm not sure if this is the same migration that's being discussed here? I'll come back and merge the threads if it is.
I was just wondering if it was just our servers affected or there were others who were having the same issue.
Posted by Justin, 09-06-2013, 01:55 PM
Sorry about that. I was in a bit of a rush to check to see if people were having the same issue because clients were concerned.
Carry on
Posted by greenreader, 09-06-2013, 09:19 PM Was it power reset? One of my server was restarted.
Posted by hostinginsiders, 09-07-2013, 08:06 AM Why have response times for tickets increased so badly? Has the staff been reduced or are they still fixing servers that broke during the migration? Will it be like this in the future or is this a temporary situation?
Posted by nkawit, 09-08-2013, 06:33 PM 1 day and no answer to a hardware replacement.
Anyone still with BurstNET needs to SERIOUSLY consider their position.
Gross lack of support. Gross lack of any telephonic emergency support. Only 4 incoming phone lines. No escalation points and blatant ignoring or hardware replacement tickets.
Not to mention selling of their UK operation and leaving clients high and dry with substandard service, if you can even call it service.
I have been with BurstNet for over 10 years. Their service has gone downhill FAST and they are not making any effort whatsoever to attend to their clients basic needs.
Posted by Jmax, 09-09-2013, 10:11 AM
Anyone still with BurstNET needs to SERIOUSLY consider their position.
Gross lack of support. Gross lack of any telephonic emergency support. Only 4 incoming phone lines. No escalation points and blatant ignoring or hardware replacement tickets.
Not to mention selling of their UK operation and leaving clients high and dry with substandard service, if you can even call it service.
I have been with BurstNet for over 10 years. Their service has gone downhill FAST and they are not making any effort whatsoever to attend to their clients basic needs.
Burst.net are probably responding as fast as they can - they just can't do everyone's tickets all at once. They're probably making solving outages the priority, and planning to release an RFO once they have the answers customers want. -JM
Posted by sysad, 09-09-2013, 01:35 PM At this time I just wonder what it is that keeps them busy. The migration took place almost a month ago. So why is the response time still so slow. I really hope BurstNET will respond to this as I am starting to think they might be in some serious trouble which they are not telling us...
Posted by BurstNET, 09-09-2013, 01:38 PM
If you paste or PM a ticket number, we can check on status for you, give it a nudge or escalate the issue if appropriate though.
WHT is not our support desk however, so do not expect us to respond as such.
.
.
Posted by creyes123, 09-09-2013, 01:53 PM My server has now been down for eight hours. My open ticket (TRW-927-54159) has been ignored for three hours. I did not get an email from them warning me about this outage.
Actually, the server itself appears to be fine. I can access it via the console. It is just the network connection that is not working. Too bad web servers need Internet connections to get the job done.
I have been with Burst.Net for about a year and a half. Pretty happy with them until about a week ago. The server has been down for a few minutes almost every day recently.
This is not good.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-09-2013, 02:14 PM
Actually, the server itself appears to be fine. I can access it via the console. It is just the network connection that is not working. Too bad web servers need Internet connections to get the job done.
I have been with Burst.Net for about a year and a half. Pretty happy with them until about a week ago. The server has been down for a few minutes almost every day recently.
This is not good.
You opened your ticket in the technical support dept, when such a ticket should go to the reboot dept...for fastest possible responses if a service is down.
Reboot tickets get priority over everything, and tech support will always take longer...depending on current support load.
I have redirected your ticket to the proper dept, and you should see activity on that very shortly.
.
.
Posted by Jmax, 09-09-2013, 02:46 PM
So I kind of doubt they're in "trouble". They're probably just stuck playing catch up.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-09-2013, 04:05 PM
So I kind of doubt they're in "trouble". They're probably just stuck playing catch up.
That is exactly the case.
A few recent network blips have been due to moving circuits from old facility to new and BGP re-converging, a Level3 fiber cut now underway in PA, etc...
Murphy's law really...a bunch of little stuff all happening around same time period, so people think it is all related, then it isn't. If was not in same time period, most would go unnoticed, and no one think anything of it, and realize just individual server/VPS affected sometimes. A minor 10 second blip right now, and people think something bigger going on, when really only a route has changed or something.
Individual servers or VPS being down, is not a network outage, although some complaints make it sound like it is. You can see a bunch of complaints about an outage, and it is just a single VPS node down, affecting numerous clients.
.
.
Posted by v20z, 09-09-2013, 04:36 PM Dear Shawn BurstNET, please pay attention to #QMZ-406-20454. Any chance to be heard earlier than in two weeks?
Posted by TechGuyAlabama, 09-09-2013, 05:03 PM
Reboot tickets get priority over everything, and tech support will always take longer...depending on current support load.
I have redirected your ticket to the proper dept, and you should see activity on that very shortly.
.
.
Reboots isn't the answer when it's ongoing...
View Ticket: #ZNL-300-74919
Posted by creyes123, 09-09-2013, 05:38 PM I'm happy to report that the problem with my server has been fixed. I am told that steps have been taken to prevent a similar problem in the future. I'm happy with the end result.
Some advice for Burst.Net:
"Reboot Request" is a very misleading label. I can reboot the server myself through the control panel. I needed technical support, not a reboot. Changing the wording on this might help lower the frustration level for your other customers.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-09-2013, 05:55 PM
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-09-2013, 05:56 PM
Some advice for Burst.Net:
"Reboot Request" is a very misleading label. I can reboot the server myself through the control panel. I needed technical support, not a reboot. Changing the wording on this might help lower the frustration level for your other customers.
Reboot dept handles reboots, outages, and anything related to a service being completely down.
.
.
Posted by TechGuyAlabama, 09-09-2013, 05:57 PM
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-09-2013, 06:07 PM
Reboots isn't the answer when it's ongoing...
View Ticket: #ZNL-300-74919
If your server keeps crashing, and not responding, that should definitely go to the reboot dept.
The DNS issues goes to basic technical support dept, and has to wait in line. This is not a fully managed service, and our "basic managed" service is basically unmanaged service, but as time permits, we'll lend a hand to assist you in such matters. Management of the server is really your responsibility.
I bumped your ticket over to reboot dept, so they can look into your claimed "server is not responding" issue. It does appear online currently when tested.
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-09-2013, 06:09 PM
Not issues caused by technical matters (like your dns problem), but definitely a server being offline and going unresponsive as you mentioned...
.
.
Posted by nkawit, 09-09-2013, 06:40 PM
Burst.net are probably responding as fast as they can - they just can't do everyone's tickets all at once. They're probably making solving outages the priority, and planning to release an RFO once they have the answers customers want. -JM
Posted by BPeccoralo, 09-09-2013, 07:10 PM Hope all works out. BurstNet has been around for a very long time and a solid provider in PA.
Something like this also is the silver lining in waking some folks up to disaster recovery; always ideal to have a DR setup or plan in events of the such... VMotion out to another location and back to BurstNet when ready.
Posted by v20z, 09-10-2013, 01:08 AM
Please believe me I feel myself very painfully embarrassed to strain and to bother you. I'm really sorry. But I'm waiting already for two weeks. My hands lowered when I'm trying to ask you something :-)
#KFH-188-12176 (August 24, no reply just silently closed) & #QMZ-406-20454 no attention, still even unassigned.
Why do we talk here but not in right place at customer service support area? Why am I not getting answers there?
Posted by mizaco, 09-10-2013, 01:12 AM I felt the effect as well. No response from them yet.
Posted by HostcrateCEO, 09-10-2013, 01:31 AM Everything seems back to normal. They've answered my tickets and my concerns.
I hope that everyone else that has reported an issue via this thread gets taken care of soon.
Posted by veedub, 09-10-2013, 04:00 AM
A few recent network blips have been due to moving circuits from old facility to new and BGP re-converging, a Level3 fiber cut now underway in PA, etc...
Murphy's law really...a bunch of little stuff all happening around same time period, so people think it is all related, then it isn't. If was not in same time period, most would go unnoticed, and no one think anything of it, and realize just individual server/VPS affected sometimes. A minor 10 second blip right now, and people think something bigger going on, when really only a route has changed or something.
Individual servers or VPS being down, is not a network outage, although some complaints make it sound like it is. You can see a bunch of complaints about an outage, and it is just a single VPS node down, affecting numerous clients.
.
.
Only been a customer for 2 almost 3 weeks and yet to see a single few days of stability. I rings true to the 'you get what you pay for' unfortunately. I say this because you guys were knocking VD for their cheap stuff and though call it a fault of mine, i expected a little bit more from BurstNET so right now i'm chalking it up to the recent move and hoping things settle next month otherwise our little test VPS will answer a few questions we needed to know.
Posted by Jmax, 09-10-2013, 08:53 AM
Posted by rish3, 09-10-2013, 10:35 AM
BurstNET® strives to maintain a 99.999% network and service uptime level, and guarantees atleast 99.5%. This uptime percentage is a monthly figure, and is is calculated solely by BurstNET® monitoring systems or BurstNET® authorized/contracted outside monitoring services. If BurstNET® fails to meet it's 99.5% uptime guarantee, and it is not due to one of the exceptions below, credits will be made available to each Client, upon request, on a case by case basis.
Posted by desynced, 09-10-2013, 12:28 PM I've been doing a server migration from two colo servers @ BurstNet today and cant even get 480GB of data transferred off of the server because it keeps timing out during the transfer. Starting attempt #3 now. *sigh*
Not even going to submit a ticket on this one. Each time I've submitted a "network down" ticket, the server gets rebooted even if the server is back online by the time they finally reboot it.
Posted by nkawit, 09-10-2013, 03:26 PM The last of our PLAN's was connected a few minutes ago. Ticket was still open since the migration with regular followups, PM'ing the representative on these forums, attempted phone calls and attempted multiple ticket logging.
Failed hardware is still outstanding.
Posted by veedub, 09-10-2013, 04:39 PM
This works out for every one of their customers to be 3.6 hours per month or 50.4 minutes per week or best of all 7 minutes 12 seconds of downtime per day @ their 99.5% SLA they find an acceptable downtime for your business. I personally don't find this acceptable and not sure who really would.
My little ole VPS currently sits at 87.06% uptime for 2 weeks so far since the 27th of August (5 minute intervals so even the uptime monitor missed a few quick outages)
Even at the uptime it's caught so far at 87.06% this is 2.5 hours per day or 20.49 hours per week and last but not least 89 hours 16 minutes per month if this current up and down continues.
Posted by NetDepot - Terrence, 09-10-2013, 04:45 PM
This works out for every one of their customers to be 3.6 hours per month or 50.4 minutes per week or best of all 7 minutes 12 seconds of downtime per day @ their 99.5% SLA they find an acceptable downtime for your business. I personally don't find this acceptable and not sure who really would.
My little ole VPS currently sits at 87.06% uptime for 2 weeks so far since the 27th of August (5 minute intervals so even the uptime monitor missed a few quick outages)
Even at the uptime it's caught so far at 87.06% this is 2.5 hours per day or 20.49 hours per week and last but not least 89 hours 16 minutes per month if this current up and down continues.
Posted by veedub, 09-10-2013, 05:03 PM
Posted by RobM, 09-10-2013, 05:15 PM They own the one in Dunmore.
The others I think they lease space from other firms.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-10-2013, 05:57 PM
This works out for every one of their customers to be 3.6 hours per month or 50.4 minutes per week or best of all 7 minutes 12 seconds of downtime per day @ their 99.5% SLA they find an acceptable downtime for your business. I personally don't find this acceptable and not sure who really would.
My little ole VPS currently sits at 87.06% uptime for 2 weeks so far since the 27th of August (5 minute intervals so even the uptime monitor missed a few quick outages)
Even at the uptime it's caught so far at 87.06% this is 2.5 hours per day or 20.49 hours per week and last but not least 89 hours 16 minutes per month if this current up and down continues.
Our SLA is being updated currently for October for 99.9% atleast....as we expect improved uptime for the new facility once all the dust settles any time now. We used to list 99.5% for the past 15+ years, even though we typically exceeded it, but our intention has always been to increase that now with our new higher-end facility once we got everything finished with the relocation.
.
.
Posted by veedub, 09-10-2013, 07:27 PM
.
.
Well I appreciate you taking the time to respond to that post. I'm sure you'll agree 99.5% with available hardware for a DC is very low. We're looking for other locations to be completely honest to colocate or rent servers from and I've had an eye on BurstNET for a long, LONG time. This is why I provided the benefit of the doubt as the move is still fresh, routers barely settled.
Posted by nibb, 09-10-2013, 10:14 PM My Miami VPS is down like for 2 hours now as well, but you know what? This is just absolutely normal at least once a week.
I have a VPS with Burst for 6 months now and so far the best uptime was 2 weeks. For the price I pay I don´t even bother to request them to honor their uptime which of course its a completely joke.
In 6 months they never even reached 95% so far as per Pingdom data but they advertise 99.99% for their network.
You get what you pay for this.
Burst net is crap. Cheap crap and you get the service for what you pay. Im happy because I would never host anything critical or serious with them anyway.
Even more funny is that I always found about this when my monitors fails and I just come here to WHT to see if im not alone.
Burst.net never seems to notice their downtime, they never post any updates in Twitter or their network page. Everyone notices their downtimes even those that last 1 to 3 hours but they never seems to even notice them or prefer to ignore them.
But they put logos like 99.99% SLA and Cisco Network and all that stuff. If I was Cisco I would be puking if someone puts my brand in such a service which has weekly outages.
To Burst Management.
Why in the world you just not raise prices and provide a more decent service? I understand they are probably not making a dime, and its what you get, but hell, I would not mind to pay a little bit more if you can actually deliver something middle to decent, not even great. The reason why I never go to them and complaint is because I know what I pay is absolutely a joke, im glad if its up 6 days of 7 a week for that price.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-10-2013, 11:55 PM
If you are putting something critical on it, that's you own mistake. You may be paying a bit more for slightly higher package, but for now I am assuming you are not on our higher end vps service, as those almost never have issues like you are reporting.
Secondly, an individual VPS or a VPS node being down has absolutely no bearing on a company as whole, their network, or their overall service levels provided.
Face it, you are probably on a cheap budget vps, sharing that node with a ton of other clients, and each and every other user on that box can affect your performance, and has the possibility to cause an entire node to have issues with abusive usage. We are not charging $50/vps and putting 5-10 vps on a node only...you are sharing the node with alot of other clientele probably. I can tell you that right off the bat, that our higher level services (premium and ssd vps packages) have much better performance and uptime, compared to our stuffed budget vps nodes. And of course, who are the biggest complainers, those clientele paying the least.
If you want more reliable service, not affected by others users as much, get away from budget VPS services, and move up to our higher level VPS offerings, or even up to Dedicated.
You are correct in something though...you do get what you pay for. Don't expect perfect service from a low end vps...it will have issues eventually. spend for the level of service you want. It's not our company that is the issue here (other than a few blips lately which should be solved now), its clients expectations needing to be realistic for the money they are spending.
PS - We do not have any VPS nodes down in Miami currently, so most likely your issue is specific to your own VPS.
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-11-2013, 12:04 AM
Keep in mind, an SLA is nothing more than marketing fluff. WE may advertise 99,5% only in our SLA, but in reality, other than during this migration recently, we have exceed that by 99.9%+ over the past 5-6 years now. We had 99.5% listed as we were a budget provider, and wanted to limit SLA refunds if/when such were needed, as remember our margins are not as high as non-budget providers. It is alot easier to refund for a month of you are charging $300 for a server at a huge margin, than it is on a < $100 server with low margins. We needed to limit that in case something did indeed happen (such as migrations issues we just had). Once in new facility, we're more confident though, and we will be moving the SLA to 99.9%, as we are going after higher end clientele than the budget market with our new facility.
Once again, an SLA level promise is just the contract terms and marketing, and says absolutely nothing about the actual typical performance level. One company may advertise 99.999% uptime, and another 99% uptime, and quite feasible the latter out performs the former. I know that was the case with us the past 5 years, over some of the providers offering higher SLA numbers than we did.
.
.
Posted by nibb, 09-11-2013, 01:06 AM
If you are putting something critical on it, that's you own mistake. You may be paying a bit more for slightly higher package, but for now I am assuming you are not on our higher end vps service, as those almost never have issues like you are reporting.
Secondly, an individual VPS or a VPS node being down has absolutely no bearing on a company as whole, their network, or their overall service levels provided.
Face it, you are probably on a cheap budget vps, sharing that node with a ton of other clients, and each and every other user on that box can affect your performance, and has the possibility to cause an entire node to have issues with abusive usage. We are not charging $50/vps and putting 5-10 vps on a node only...you are sharing the node with alot of other clientele probably. I can tell you that right off the bat, that our higher level services (premium and ssd vps packages) have much better performance and uptime, compared to our stuffed budget vps nodes. And of course, who are the biggest complainers, those clientele paying the least.
If you want more reliable service, not affected by others users as much, get away from budget VPS services, and move up to our higher level VPS offerings, or even up to Dedicated.
You are correct in something though...you do get what you pay for. Don't expect perfect service from a low end vps...it will have issues eventually. spend for the level of service you want. It's not our company that is the issue here (other than a few blips lately which should be solved now), its clients expectations needing to be realistic for the money they are spending.
PS - We do not have any VPS nodes down in Miami currently, so most likely your issue is specific to your own VPS.
.
.
Im not the one that is putting allot of clients per node like you said. You are. I have no control over the node but I did went to school and know basic math. If a node and hardware can´t take it, then don´t do it. Measure = Calculate: Simple.
I don´t sell cars where the wheels go off after 100 miles just because I could in order to turn prices down.
I get what I pay for and im fine with it. At least with this burst service...
Your comment actually says "We know its cheap and so we put as many VPS before the server actually explodes"
You are basically admitting that the price and server like this is not sustainable as business model, so my question is, why are you offering it? Just to make a few more bucks but actually do 100 times more damage to your brand and company?
If I was a hosting company I would make a ROI and calculate the lowest price I can sell without sacrificing quality before going with the approach, at least basic things which someone needs, extra stuff can be left out in order to drop costs. But your idea is like lets put a price and lets put as many customers until we make it to that the per node...
I understand overselling is something you admit to be doing and any company does, but when you can´t deliver what is promised in the offer, then don´t offer it. If you promise 1000 GB a month for 10$ and you can´t deliver, then don´t. If you promise 99.9% uptime for 10$ and month you can´t, then don´t. Its called business practice.
Burst is the one that needs to calculate how much they should charge in order to actually still be able to deliver at the lowest possible price. If you can´t beat that price, then you know for sure you need to make some cheating. Overload servers, or any other cheap tricks to decrease levels of services to a point you can make a few bucks.
So why did I buy it? On your website I could not read what you said. Do you offer 10$ VPS and put in the offer "This VPS will have downtime must of the time, understand this is budget and we put more VPS than a server can actually handle, don´t expect to much and pay something higher if you actually need medium to decent levels of uptime and performance..."
No. That is not what Burst or any of this cheap companies put in their offers. They just advertise all the little nice things which are mostly not existent in real life when you use the service. At least you are being honest with your post, but in the order and service page there are tons of things advertised like Cisco Networks, SLA, etc, etc, etc.
Guess what? I can´t possible know this features are only available for higher end customers. At least I would reconsider now if you tell which are those plans, as I could not make a difference between then when I ordered. There are just different in terms of limits but they all seem to have more or less the same specs in regards to network, power, etc. Or maybe I was wrong...
Also, how many customers like me do you think Burst has? How many do you think actually say "ok, its cheap so I don´t expect anything"
A customers tries a service, and even if its for 1$, the quality and service delivered should be the same quality level you get with a 300$/month server. This at least in terms of network, bandwidth, SLA, support, etc.
I can´t possible imagine that the cheapest products are actually in a different network which are not redundant, of are in your home connected to your fiber connection if what you advertised is different. From a consumer point of view I assume Burst as a company has this features in general, not per product itself. Unless you actually do have different networks, and power agreements, and different hardware, etc, depending on which plan the customer gets.
This would mean you actually have crappy customers like me and VIP customers. I would prefer if all customers are VIP regardless of what they pay, but I get it... there is the low cheap ones and the other ones. Funny that Burst is actually known for the cheap ones.
Maybe at least this budget companies should be honest and inform customers what to possible expect with their services. Im sure other people who actually want to host a website or something that needs some uptime level would not be so happy to find out their dollars gets them just some partial features.
Also, this is not the first time I was told the same thing. Its your node, its your node!
I´m sorry but I do actually know some thing or two about networks, and I can tell you that this cuts are at the network level, they do not even reach burst.net, this are not load problems of an overloaded server with intermittent connections, or casual resets, this are cuts, like if someone is actually turning off and on the switch, and they last from 20 minutes to 3 hours or something that is crashing and someone eventually turns it back on.
When this happens, I can´t even access my burst control panel, even that service page where the product is listed, is not loading. Unless you host your customer control panel in the same node which I use, then I don´t think that is possible. And its also just a casualty that other people here in WHT comment they also have troubles when this happens.
Actually, why should I care if its your node, or your network, or your server, or just the DC in Miami, or just a sector or just a rack. I don´t care, because its not my job to monitor this things. Of course for those prices I don´t even thing this systems are remotely monitored, even the monitoring would cost more than the profits you make per VPS, because if someone was actually watching over things like ping packets, traceroutes, switches, routers, racks, hardware load, disk, temperature, and all those gazillion things you can control and check live to see if every single server and rack is working Burst would be actually be able to inform they have problems. I thing Burst just waits until someone opens a ticket and says they are down, this is probably the way you monitor your service.
And by the way, you don´t actually think I just use Burst? I also use Rackspace, Amazon, Softlayer, SingleHop, Liquid Web, and like other 10 providers. And in some I pay in one month what I would pay Burst in 10 years, still I would never even remotely thing of getting a more expensive service with Burst, because once you enter a certain price range, lets say 500$ a month, why in the world would I go with a budget low quality company if my money can get me the best of the best?
And this is exactly the impression I have from Burst, and it all comes because you offer those cheap budget half working crappy VPS, which work for what I need but my need for that is so low that I don´t think how it could work for anything else besides that, that at least if they would work correctly I would say "ahh this is to good to be true" instead of "ha, I knew it".
If it makes you feel better I would not go with Hetzner and other of this crap companies that build servers from low cheap desktop refurbished parts either. If I pay a server in a datacenter, I want the real stuff and gear, not someone playing the hosting company. And yes I gladly pay for that quality.
The reason I do post this, is because this cuts are take me time. And its annoying to the point when my sensors tell me this Burst VPS in Miami is down I just ignore it and say "ahh, well, burst is having problems again" because so far not a single time it was my VPS or service that crashed. Still it takes me 10 minutes to check it and its annoying to do this every week.
If it makes you happy, I never ever opened a single support ticket. And neither would I even dare to request credits for downtime or request anything at all. I think even replying to one support ticket would cost more than what I pay per month so I would actually feel bad about it. Im actually a very nice crappy customer, because I always pay on time and never demand anything from Burst either.
I don´t even demand to have great uptime or performance, or support, or any of those nice things that are advertised in the website. I actually feel a bit sorry for you having to work and represent such a low quality brand and company. If I was the owner I would probably have committed suicide by now based on the reputation of my name on the company or if I was an employee I would be depressed every day trying to argue all the time with this low paying customers that expect the world for their money that is not worth anything or justifying all the time why things go wrong.
You are just doing your job and I respect you for that, since its not your fault either.
Posted by nibb, 09-12-2013, 07:17 PM Ah and not even 24 hours passed since I posted my previous reply and its down again.
Losing 6 out of every 10 packets.
Posted by veedub, 09-12-2013, 07:43 PM
Keep in mind, an SLA is nothing more than marketing fluff. WE may advertise 99,5% only in our SLA, but in reality, other than during this migration recently, we have exceed that by 99.9%+ over the past 5-6 years now. We had 99.5% listed as we were a budget provider, and wanted to limit SLA refunds if/when such were needed, as remember our margins are not as high as non-budget providers. It is alot easier to refund for a month of you are charging $300 for a server at a huge margin, than it is on a < $100 server with low margins. We needed to limit that in case something did indeed happen (such as migrations issues we just had). Once in new facility, we're more confident though, and we will be moving the SLA to 99.9%, as we are going after higher end clientele than the budget market with our new facility.
Once again, an SLA level promise is just the contract terms and marketing, and says absolutely nothing about the actual typical performance level. One company may advertise 99.999% uptime, and another 99% uptime, and quite feasible the latter out performs the former. I know that was the case with us the past 5 years, over some of the providers offering higher SLA numbers than we did.
.
.
I seen your response to Nibb and wanted to also comment on this. Though it's a budget VPS, he has a point. If you need to oversell to ensure a ROI. I recommend brainstorming your pricing if the current model is unsustainable with decent quality service. I think you need to remind yourself that just because it's cheap, doesn't mean it's not your duty to try and impress that your servers, network, staff are the best. Overselling is not a very welcomed practice anywhere, so if this means your cheapest VPS should sit at $14.99 and not $5 then i suggested going that route to stop overselling. You are essentially continuing to sell something you do not have the resources to sell and this is frowned upon in every industry.
To drive my point further.. for example, we have a dev environment setup with PhoenixNAP on a rented server at the moment. I'd consider it a budget server at $48 a month for us to develop/test on. It currently sits at a 100% uptime for 5 months. So it isn't always about getting what you pay for, it's also about the company that sells it.
Posted by veedub, 09-13-2013, 03:50 AM and the server or node goes down.... again.
Posted by veedub, 09-13-2013, 04:18 AM
This just screams oversold - http://postimg.org/image/6ge2mt7v9/
Posted by Tcalp, 09-13-2013, 08:16 AM
This just screams oversold - http://postimg.org/image/6ge2mt7v9/
Posted by veedub, 09-13-2013, 08:44 AM
This isn't about the performance of the VPS, it's about the network, overselling the node and instability. VPS performance for what i need functions 100%. If you notice by the screenshot utilization is at 100% which means all users on that node are hammering it and only real answer on an E5 to that is it being oversold or heavy abuse from someone.
Posted by nibb, 09-13-2013, 08:49 AM SLA is marketing and bluff?
Ah my God I cannot believe that a hosting company would say something like this.
SLA agreements are not marketing bluff. An agreement is a legal agreement and when someone clicks "Accept" on the website its the same as a legal signature in the US, this was passed by congress with the e sign act.
If you consider the SLA agreement marketing bluff, the same can your customers claim about your own TOS if you try to enforce it. They can send spam or not pay and them slap the same argument in your face, that your terms of service agreement is just marketing and it has no real value.
No sir. An agreement is not bluff. People are sued for agreements all the time.
SLA agreements are not marketing either. There is a reason why its called "SLA", "Service Level Agreement", read the agreement part on it.
I know carriers that have SLA on packet delivery, in which you measure packets and they need to guarantee a specific % of delivery which is usually in the high nines ranges.
What is marketing is some providers offering 100% uptime which is a plain lie because not even IBM datacenters or Google delivers that. Never in the history of this planet was a service able to hit 100%. But usually the companies that offer this explain that in the SLA as well.
First, they actually do offer refunds if its below that. Or they explain that this do not include maintenances, power issues, etc.
People should be aware of this. This is a little trick and most people are not aware. Even a server or switch reboot requires a couple of minutes so someone that says they offer 99.99% for the network may be on the real side but someone saying 99.99% of the end service may not, unless they are providing refunds because nobody can react in seconds, that is just seconds of downtime. Even software takes seconds to boot, and its impossible not have a problem that last even as far as 40 seconds.
Also, there are 2 types of SLA which I know in hosting. Inclusive and exclusive. One of them offer real uptime SLA for the end service, with maintenances and outages all included in the %.
Others say that % is without scheduled maintenances or hardware problems, or what ever they put int the SLA and this way they cheat customers. If they have a 5 hours outage, they say it was maintenances, so they don't have to agree the uptime. I invented this terms myself because this last one if the one that most hosting companies actually use to offer 99.99% and 100%, then they have problems and say its excluded from the SLA. The first one is actually used by telcos and more serious companies. Sadly hosting is prostituted from overselling to marketing lies.
Sorry, but no. SLA are not marketing. They are very, very real. The only company that would say SLA is bluff and marketing is a company that cannot deliver them or does not have customers that demand them. Any corporate customers the first thing they would demand is an SLA for the services provided. That is the why they are paying you!!! In order not to have to deal with hardware, power, network and what ever the service includes. They want it all delivered and included.
The minute you enter hosting which is not just basic Wordpress blogs, and more important stuff, customers demand a real SLA to hire a service, because the SLA is the only thing that can make a difference between someone that is willing to provide it and someone that fails multiple times. Everyone fails and errors happen, but a company with a real SLA at least is accountable for it. They lose money and this hurts, since they need to refund customers. And nobody wants to lose money.
I have Colo agreements and SLA is a big deal for power and facility. Even the most crappy facilities offer an SLA, if they deliver or not, that is another story, but why in the world would you host hardware in a facility that has no guarantees?
Why would you use a hosting company if they are actually not promising anything at all?
Cheap does not mean bad. It usually is but not always. There are companies that focus on cheap for example and only have 1 single line of products, they do one single thing and do it right, they have no support, or anything fancy, they just focus all their resources in providing this one thing very, very cheap and it works. In hosting usually cheap means crap because technology is not cheap. Good hardware and network is expensive, and there are prices you cannot enter, it doesn't mater what excuse someone says or how big you are, there are costs which you have in order to maintain a medium service.
Also, there is something to know in hosting. The less someone pays the more he demands. The cheap customers are the worst ones because they have no sense of value and what it costs to deliver that service. Not only you don´t make money but they hurt your brand more than nothing in particular when you have downtimes.
Posted by nibb, 09-13-2013, 08:55 AM
This isn't about the performance of the VPS, it's about the network, overselling the node and instability. VPS performance for what i need functions 100%. If you notice by the screenshot utilization is at 100% which means all users on that node are hammering it and only real answer on an E5 to that is it being oversold or heavy abuse from someone.
I just use it for a simple packet re transmission for a monitoring station. Absolutely nothing more, this is as simple as DNS, but anything more than that would probably spike it to 100%.
The nodes are so oversold that are probably usable for running 1 single process or service per VPS.
I could even live with this since its very cheap, but the network is also constantly losing packets, going up in latency and having 1 or 2 cuts every week.
I paid like 5 times that before, but I had to save some bucks in a few services for a couple of months, once im ok again I will surely move this to something more expensive and decent.
Posted by PeanutHosting, 09-13-2013, 09:15 AM
This just screams oversold - http://postimg.org/image/6ge2mt7v9/is all i can say.
Posted by gingir, 09-13-2013, 09:44 AM I am astonished by some of the posts I read in here.
Is it really that bad even considering price paid?
Posted by veedub, 09-13-2013, 09:55 AM
Is it really that bad even considering price paid?
The point i'm trying to drive is, the onus is not on the consumer. It is on the business providing the service. If you want to undercut competition with low priced VPS, ensure you can produce the resources required otherwise you're selling something you do not have.
So end of the day, does it matter if you pay $1 or $99? It should still produce as advertised.
Let's not forget the $59.95 VPS they sell is from the same list as the $7.95. It's Xen just like the $8 VPS and is very likely the $60 VPS runs off the same nodes as the the $8 ones. So that in mind, the price doesn't matter if it's on the same network, same marketing page advertising the same service.
Posted by gingir, 09-13-2013, 10:13 AM
The point i'm trying to drive is, the onus is not on the consumer. It is on the business providing the service. If you want to undercut competition with low priced VPS, ensure you can produce the resources required otherwise you're selling something you do not have.
So end of the day, does it matter if you pay $1 or $99? It should still produce as advertised.
Let's not forget the $59.95 VPS they sell is from the same list as the $7.95.
I am just bemused by how the tables turned.
I still remember the first thread I opened in this forum criticizing burstnet.eu modus operandi and all the abuse I got for doing so.
Posted by veedub, 09-13-2013, 10:16 AM
I am just bemused by how the tables turned.
I still remember the first thread I opened in this forum criticizing burstnet.eu modus operandi and all the abuse I got for doing so.
Posted by kpmedia, 09-13-2013, 10:53 AM
Is it really that bad even considering price paid?
Price doesn't change this.
.
.
Posted by gingir, 09-13-2013, 11:33 AM
Price doesn't change this.
.
.
I must have wrote that post with my feet.
At such prices I would expect some downtime but of course not what's going on here.
This is what I originally meant.
Posted by AzAzov, 09-14-2013, 05:57 PM We pay $1000+/month and our servers are not accessible again. Would not recommend this company to anyone!
Posted by veedub, 09-14-2013, 10:49 PM .
.
.
removed this for now to contact tech support
Posted by nibb, 09-15-2013, 02:16 AM
Is it really that bad even considering price paid?
Lets see. Pingdom tells me its down so far 23 hours 58 minutes.
Maybe its going to work again by Monday, maybe not...
The last 30 days:
Uptime: 86,13%
Downtime: 4d 4h 20m
Number of Downtimes: 24
Notice this months its going to get worst, because this must be longest downtime so far, more than 24 hours so far.
I will get to almost 10 full days of downtime for 6 months of service, or more than 240 hours of downtime. It barely achieves 94%.
Posted by Nietcheese, 09-15-2013, 09:50 PM Yup server down.
Can ping it, some sites are loading, but can't access control panel, can't complete a traceroute, can't ssh.
Posted by Mowd, 09-15-2013, 10:47 PM I just connect burstnet by AIM, they said their engineer department are working on this issue, and no ETA bring things back to normal
Posted by ex0de, 09-16-2013, 12:06 PM My vps is down for more than a day now, no answer to ticket since a full day now. No one responds on AIM either...
Posted by BurstNET, 09-16-2013, 12:17 PM
You'll need wait for response on your ticket.
If your specific VPS is down, then email reboot@burst.net for fastest response.
Most likely you are delayed due to emailing general technical support dept.
.
.
Posted by ex0de, 09-16-2013, 12:33 PM
You'll need wait for response on your ticket.
If your specific VPS is down, then email reboot@burst.net for fastest response.
Most likely you are delayed due to emailing general technical support dept.
.
.
Posted by gingir, 09-16-2013, 02:55 PM
Lets see. Pingdom tells me its down so far 23 hours 58 minutes.
Maybe its going to work again by Monday, maybe not...
The last 30 days:
Uptime: 86,13%
Downtime: 4d 4h 20m
Number of Downtimes: 24
Notice this months its going to get worst, because this must be longest downtime so far, more than 24 hours so far.
I will get to almost 10 full days of downtime for 6 months of service, or more than 240 hours of downtime. It barely achieves 94%.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-16-2013, 03:54 PM These recent posts are all non-relevant to this thread, as none of them are related to the migration issues we had.
You'll need to wait until our staff responds to your tickets, if your service is down. We are not having any network or company wide issues, and at most you have a VPS node down (...and I know that we do not have any nodes down as I write this), if not just your own individual VPS. We find that in some of these cases it is neither, and the client botched their own VPS config or data structure. In those cases it is client's responsibility to re-install their VPS. regardless, open a ticket to reboot@burst.net, NOT to support@burst.net, as you could be waiting a long time for technical support, whereas a outage no a service sent to the proper place for help gets a much faster response. I see clients opening a ticket here and there in the billing dept for a VPS being down, and then wondering why they get a delayed response. Follow proper procedures and you'll receive much better service levels, rather than delaying your issue yourself..
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-16-2013, 03:58 PM
Lets see. Pingdom tells me its down so far 23 hours 58 minutes.
Maybe its going to work again by Monday, maybe not...
The last 30 days:
Uptime: 86,13%
Downtime: 4d 4h 20m
Number of Downtimes: 24
Notice this months its going to get worst, because this must be longest downtime so far, more than 24 hours so far.
I will get to almost 10 full days of downtime for 6 months of service, or more than 240 hours of downtime. It barely achieves 94%.
99.9% chance this is your VPS only having said issue, as I know for a fact that we do not have any nodes down that long (maybe an hour here or there if they had an issue at most.), and have had zero network issues either as things have settled down here following the migration. As far as I know, you may have actually been suspended for billing, abuse, or bandwidth usage. We did go thru in the last 7-10 days and suspend alot of VPS for those reasons actually. Supply a ticket number, and let's get to the bottom of it.
.
.
Posted by ex0de, 09-16-2013, 07:44 PM
.
.
Posted by raymor, 09-19-2013, 05:42 PM
.
ROTFL. There are what, a hundred customers in this thread alone. Figure one customer of 1,000 posts on WHT, that's about 100,000 customers with problems. Also known as ALL of them.
We have about six servers left with Burst.net. At least one of them has ben down for a day every single month, for several months now. I have a reboot request in now on a machine that's been dwn for about 24 hours - no reply from you guys.
Fortunately I have my own 20U half rack I'm moving those servers to. It's a lot more space than I need, but I'll have a heck of a lot better than the 82% uptime Burstnet provides.
Posted by nibb, 09-19-2013, 06:59 PM
You'll need to wait until our staff responds to your tickets, if your service is down. We are not having any network or company wide issues, and at most you have a VPS node down (...and I know that we do not have any nodes down as I write this), if not just your own individual VPS. We find that in some of these cases it is neither, and the client botched their own VPS config or data structure. In those cases it is client's responsibility to re-install their VPS. regardless, open a ticket to reboot@burst.net, NOT to support@burst.net, as you could be waiting a long time for technical support, whereas a outage no a service sent to the proper place for help gets a much faster response. I see clients opening a ticket here and there in the billing dept for a VPS being down, and then wondering why they get a delayed response. Follow proper procedures and you'll receive much better service levels, rather than delaying your issue yourself..
.
.Then the node has problems all the time. No I was not suspended for billing as far a I know, because you require payments upfront, this means the invoices you pay are actually for the next month and even if that was the case how would I know? Because when this happens even the control panel in your website does not work, when you click on your VPS to display it, it says unavailable, so there is no way to know if its for billing, node down, etc.Quote:
.
.
Its easy to say its was just your node, unless all other customers here are also in that node and Burst just has one single server. Should I care if the node is down? No. Because I don´t pay the node, I pay the VPS and so it should be up. One thing is the VPS crashing, the OS, another one is if the hardware/node is down, there is nothing I can do anyway, not even reboot the VPS. If a hosting company is providing VPS services, its their responsibility to maintain uptime and performance on each of their nodes.
This is not different if a company where you lease servers tells you "We had no problems, it was probably just the switch in your rack that was down..."
Or "We had no network problem, probably the datacenter where your server is had a power outage"
If my downtime had nothing to do with this thread then im even more worried because it means its normal to be down for 3 days.
Also you mentioned, we do not have nodes down for that long, maybe an hour or so. Really? Because I did nothing, it came back online without doing anything, if it was only my VPS being down, it would not come up again unless I do a hard reboot. The VPS has 0 load on it, 0 ram usage, 0 traffic, nothing. So it would be pretty strange that it goes down just like that without a reason. Not to mention when this happens, your control panel also says unavailable for that VPS. So what exactly should I do except just wait? I actually do this. It goes offline on a Friday and I just know it will come back again probably on Sunday.
And no, I never opened a ticket, because like I said before, I hardly care about the services in that VPS, I just wait until something figures out. I assumed your NOC center has some monitoring but it seems they actually wait for a customer to inform them when their node is down.
I'm pretty sick of having to post here as well, so I will just be looking somewhere else. I don´t think another company can be this bad, not even free services have this kind of outages.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-19-2013, 07:34 PM
I highly doubt that.
Our services have been rock solid for years, prior to the issues that popped up due to our migration.
They will get right back to that level of service provided prior to the migration, improving every day since the migration completion, as we continuously get caught up with the workload.That's just complete nonsense. I'm not even going to bother wasting my time on that ridiculous statement.Quote:
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-19-2013, 07:40 PM At this point this thread needs to be closed.
Our migration is over and done with some time ago.
Any servers having an issue would be unrelated to our migration, and thus not relevant to this thread regarding our migration.
We are not going to provide support thru this thread.
You'll need to contact us via approved support methods, of which WHT is NOT one of them, and wait for a response.
If you need a reboot, or your service is down, you should open it to the correct dept (Reboots), as if you don't, and open it in Customer Service or Technical Support, you will be delaying resolution, potentially for many hours.
Only our Reboot dept is dealt with as priority items, and looked at first and foremost for urgent issues.
Sending non-urgent issues to the reboot dept, will get them transferred right out of it, and only delay response to those items for you.
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-19-2013, 07:49 PM We provide an unmanaged service for the most part. 12-24 hours for a response on non-emergency technical support issues, many of which we may not have to assist with at all (but do so anyways as timers permits to help our clientele out...) is not unreasonable for the low cost prices we charge. Many of you may have just been spoiled with much faster responses from us in the past.
Our goal is to get response times back to those levels, but that does not mean we are doing anything wrong, or providing bad support, when we are responding slower now than in the past. Current response times are what should be expected for the ridiculously low prices we charge. In the past we just blew that out of the water with our much faster responses times, as our workload was not as high. We'll get back to that as time goes on here following the migration, but by no means does that mean that support is poor if we are not there yet...just because we are at slower response times than our prior killer fast times our client base was used to.
.
.
Posted by raymor, 09-19-2013, 08:10 PM
...
That's just complete nonsense. I'm not even going to bother wasting my time on that ridiculous statement.
.
.
You are seriously in here calling your customers liars? Really?
I don't mind posting screen caps o the tickets in here if you want to call me a liar.
Everyone can see your 24-48 hour response time for themselves.
I have an idea. How about instead of being here saying your customers are a bunch of liars, you go reboot the damn server. It's been down for at least 28 hours. You could have rebooted it faster than you can come in here posting bull.
Posted by raymor, 09-19-2013, 08:16 PM
Our services have been rock solid for years, prior to the issues that popped up due to our migration.
They will get right back to that level of service provided prior to the migration, improving every day since the migration completion, as we continuously get caught up with the workload.
That's just complete nonsense. I'm not even going to bother wasting my time on that ridiculous statement.
.
.
I just spoke to your rep on the phone and he confirmed what I posted. On my Android phone I have it set to record calls by default.
Would you like me to post the audio of your rep confirming it, or would you like to apologize for calling me a liar?
Posted by BurstNET, 09-19-2013, 08:46 PM
1. Your (incorrectly) assuming I am even in the data center.
2. Do you really want a non-technical personal handling your server. Think about that, and how ridiculous that statement really was.
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-19-2013, 08:52 PM
Would you like me to post the audio of your rep confirming it, or would you like to apologize for calling me a liar?
I highly doubt that you had six dedicated servers down, one each for over a day, for the past few months.
That is unheard of here, and I just can't believe that.
I'm sure there is more to this than that.
By saying it was over "past few months", that makes me question it further, as if it all occurred during last month's migration, maybe, but not in the months prior when there were no major issues that would have caused 6 servers for the same client to all be down (unless you had hundreds of servers with us, and 6 out of that number is by the number somewhat feasible if something odd occured).
Now if you come back and say that by "server" you actually meant VPS, and we find out these 6 VPS are all on just 1-2 nodes, and those specific two nodes had some issues the past few months, then that would make more sense and make this more feasible to have occurred.
Post the ticket numbers, and let's just see.
I'm quite interested myself in finding out what actually occurred here.
I'm not calling you a liar, I'm just saying I think there is more to this than you are stating here.
.
.
Posted by raymor, 09-19-2013, 09:18 PM Ticket number #NUD-197-78362 : A dedicated server, reboot ticket filed August 13th. Rebooted 19 August 19th - SIX DAYS LATER. Six days. Do you find that feasible? How's the SLA credit coming on that, BTW?
How about 28 hours for ticket #WEA-918-85623 in June? Do you "know for a fact .. not more than an hour", on that one?
You guys have a SERIOUS customer service problem, both in response time and attitude. Facing that problem and finding a way
to fix it will let your company thrive. Denying it will see you all looking for a job soon.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-19-2013, 09:30 PM
How about 28 hours for ticket #WEA-918-85623 in June? Do you "know for a fact .. not more than an hour", on that one?
You guys have a SERIOUS customer service problem, both in response time and attitude. Facing that problem and finding a way
to fix it will let your company thrive. Denying it will see you all looking for a job soon.
As expected, you were exaggerating.
I have reviewed all support tickets on your account for past 4-5 months....there were not many.
I see no such info on six servers down a day each during each of the past few months as you claim.
Based on your tickets, that is just plain untruthful.
I do see that you had excessive downtime on the one server you mentioned specifically. It appears to be hardware related from details in the ticket. As expected, this occurred right smack in the middle of our migration period. We had major delays, issues, and unacceptable response times during our migration, due to unexpected issues that arose, we fully own up to that. But too say this all was going on for months prior, is just not true.
Also, it is important to note that you were not ignored for size days on the issue. You had constant responses during that time frame from our staff, even if final resolution did not occur yet. We didn't just not do anything for 6 days on the matter. Unfortunately, resolution just took excessively long, as we had our hands full cleaning up so many issues from the migration.
The rest of tickets on the account seem to be VPS related, and were repaired with assistance from our staff, or were from a suspension based to bandwidth abuse on your end.
PS - For an SLA credit, you would ave needed to file a request for such. I may have missed it, but I see no such request having been filed from you.
.
.
Posted by ex0de, 09-19-2013, 10:17 PM
Our goal is to get response times back to those levels, but that does not mean we are doing anything wrong, or providing bad support, when we are responding slower now than in the past. Current response times are what should be expected for the ridiculously low prices we charge. In the past we just blew that out of the water with our much faster responses times, as our workload was not as high. We'll get back to that as time goes on here following the migration, but by no means does that mean that support is poor if we are not there yet...just because we are at slower response times than our prior killer fast times our client base was used to.
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-19-2013, 10:23 PM
Can one slip thru the cracks once in awhile?...sure, but that is a rarity.
Please provide ticket # for proof of your claim that we did not respond at all...
.
.
Posted by ex0de, 09-19-2013, 10:45 PM
Can one slip thru the cracks once in awhile?...sure, but that is a rarity.
Please provide ticket # for proof of your claim that we did not respond at all...
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-19-2013, 11:46 PM
We're talking about YOU here, not another poster. I already addresses that poster, and found his claim was not exactly accurate.
You specifically said "No this is not about "slower response" it's about NO response at all!". You just contradicted yourself.
Which is it...did you get a response from us or not? Sounds to me like you DID, albiet slow, and just stated you didn't for some reason.
.
.
Posted by ex0de, 09-19-2013, 11:57 PM
You specifically said "No this is not about "slower response" it's about NO response at all!". You just contradicted yourself.
Which is it...did you get a response from us or not? Sounds to me like you DID, albiet slow, and just stated you didn't for some reason.
.
.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-20-2013, 12:10 AM
Thank you for admitting that you contradicted yourself though.
.
.
Posted by raymor, 09-20-2013, 12:29 AM Dear Burstnet rep,
For fifteen years, I ran a successful software business. Last week I had to let it go, "sold" for what it used to make in two weeks.
My business died for one reason. I'm very good at what I do, and I hired smart people. We did a great job. The problem was, we did a great job EVENTUALLY, slow response. Slow response killed our business.
If I saw a snake about to bite you, I'd warn you. I see a big ass rattlesnake crawling up your leg, the same one that bit us. It WILL kill you if you ignore it, just pretend it isn't there.
It takes almost the exact same number of staff to respond six days later as it takes to respond 6 minutes later.
You have to manage X tickets per day, whether you do X old tickets or X new tickets, it's the same workload.
You're just a about two days or so behind is all, and need to get caught up. After that, providing great service is FREE. The same employee who used to answer 100 old tickets can just as easily answer 100 fresh ones.
I realized that too late.
Now about your continued claim that I'm lying or exaggerating. I said "We have about six servers with Burstnet. ... at least one of them has been down". Read that one more time. Especially the "one of them has been down" part. Are you clear about what "one of them has been down" means? Okay, now why exactly are you trying to claim I said six down per day?
By the way, there's a reason I said "about six". That because I've lost track since we're moving servers away from you guys as fast as practicable. Our storage cluster alone is 46 TB. We could have been a very good client for you if you'd have simply answered reboot tickets promptly on the first few test servers. Instead, we're moving servers away from Burst.
So I say again - watch out, there's a big ass snake on you, and it will bite.
Posted by ex0de, 09-20-2013, 12:29 AM
Thank you for admitting that you contradicted yourself though.
.
.
Posted by teck, 09-20-2013, 10:31 AM
I don't think people realize the person behind the BurstNET user is the CEO himself.
Posted by saschoen, 09-20-2013, 10:58 AM they just need to hire an army of help desk workers to bang out all the support tickets. hire some temp contractors or something. the network is fine and my server is fine but support sucks. thats the only issue i have with burst.
Posted by raymor, 09-20-2013, 02:22 PM
Of course it's not quite the same since you don't receive the same number of tickets every day. They'd need to increase tech support cost by maybe 10% to avoid getting behind again.
Compared to the cost of power, bandwidth, cooling, etc. it's hard to believe that 10% of the tech support cost would be a huge issue, but no tech support makes all that power, bandwidth etc. useless.
I can't bandwidth from you when the servers or network are down so often.
Posted by HostcrateCEO, 09-20-2013, 03:02 PM I must say that some of the post I have seen here are just wow. During the migration was the only time in the years I have been with BurstNet that support response time was slower which I think given the situation is understandable. The downtime I experienced during the migration was quite minimum and my clients were fine with it given what they were doing that caused the downtime.
To put it all out there, I have never had the downtime that others are claiming to have here and I have three dedicated servers. In fact, I have had nothing but very good I would say uptime from BurstNET even during the migration as it was only a few hours of down time. Since switching to BurstNET (through a reseller provider), I cannot say I have any negative comments to say about them especially after having switch from not one but TWO very well known providers that could not for the life of them handle the services in which I provide (Shoutcast Streaming) with even one of those providers stating that it was because of us and it wasn't their network that just couldn't handle it. I won't mention these providers out of respect. But BurstNET should be given a hell of a lot more credit that they get because I have been nothing but impressed by them. The dedicated servers I have with them are unmanaged but they will answer my support tickets and help even though technically they could tell me that I'm on my own and close the ticket but they don't. On top of that, my servers are through a reseller and not directly ordered from BurstNET so technically I should be going to the person I got the servers from - not the datacenter but BurstNET still supports me without telling me to go to whom I ordered the servers through.
With the other providers, I had nothing but issues. Not only could their networks not handle the streaming of my clients but their support was always very quick to point blame on my end. There was so much downtime from these providers it was ridiculous. And if they had any maintenance - I wouldn't see my servers back up for over 1,000 minutes!
And since seeing all these negative comments about their support or issues the end user is having I had to chime in to say that first things first, when submitting a ticket to send it to the proper email that relates to your issue and never open multiple tickets about the same issue. If you need a reboot, send it to the reboot email address. Also to add to that, you will receive an email confirmation of them receiving your ticket, if you don't then it is highly liikely they didn't get that ticket so go check yourself to make sure by logging into the support system. When opening a ticket, put all the necessary information in the ticket to begin with - don't continue to add information using the reply button. If they need more details, they will ask you for them. If you have the tools to fix the issue(s) yourself, then give it a shot before submitting a ticket. If you fail, then open a ticket.
If you are having such issues with a VPS, I suggest getting a dedicated just so you don't have to share with anyone else and have to worry that if person A is sucking the life out that it won't affect you.
Since posting this thread, getting a reply from BurstNET, and having the migration completed, I haven't had any issues at all. And so far for September, I have had 100% uptime.
Posted by saschoen, 09-20-2013, 03:07 PM I have had good uptime and performance with my dedicated server, its just that there have been two different instances where i waited 5+ days to get a support issue resolved. they did reboot my server in under 30 minutes the one time I needed that done. From my experience, its just a support issue. I don't mind even a 24 hour response time but five days or more... that means I cant use it for any business related thing at all.
Posted by HostcrateCEO, 09-20-2013, 03:14 PM
Posted by veedub, 09-21-2013, 05:30 AM Shawn i presume. Since you were getting flack for how messy your billing area was, i wanted to give you a small kudos for finally updating it as it looks much cleaner now.
Progress for sure.
Posted by BurstNET, 09-21-2013, 12:15 PM
Progress for sure.
Thanks...much appreciated.
It's just a new skin.
We finally had time to get it uploaded this week, after it was designed a couple months ago.
.
.
Posted by FRH Lisa, 09-21-2013, 12:38 PM
It's just a new skin.
We finally had time to get it uploaded this week, after it was designed a couple months ago.
.
.
Posted by CyberLie, 09-21-2013, 02:47 PM Mr CEO of Burstnet,
Would you mind reading my high priority ticket NKL-262-27090 21 September 2013 04:52 AM and LPU-283-25828 21 September 2013 05:40 AM ?
It's been more than 9 hours, still "Unassigned" Thank you
Posted by BurstNET, 09-21-2013, 03:43 PM
Would you mind reading my high priority ticket NKL-262-27090 21 September 2013 04:52 AM and LPU-283-25828 21 September 2013 05:40 AM ?
It's been more than 9 hours, still "Unassigned" Thank you
You sent reboot tickets to the technical support dept...which explains your response delay.
I transferred them to the reboot dept for you, and I'm sure they will be attended to rapidly now.
.
.
Posted by CyberLie, 09-21-2013, 04:05 PM Cool,
Still waiting for the reboot.Thanks
Posted by CyberLie, 09-21-2013, 11:30 PM CLOSED, after the tech plug his keyboard in, he he he.Thanks Mr.CEO
Posted by CyberLie, 09-22-2013, 04:51 AM Hello,
The server is dead again, seems to be primary HDD failure.I can not access your support portal.It's emergency, I need to bring the server back online ASAP.How can I reach the tech guys ? Thanks
--------https://support.burst.net/ error messages--------
User Error
Unable to connect to Database. Please verify the username, password, grant permissions and the database status. (./__swift/library/class.SWIFT.php:16)
=================================================================================================================================
Posted by infracom2005, 09-29-2013, 01:12 PM yes, their are very unprofesional. Their only reply is
"At this time services from our Miami DC are being migrated to a new site. As soon as our migration team can get the node that hosts you VPS back online the node should then proceed to boot your VPS. I am sorry, but at this time we do not have an ETA for when this will be completed."
4 hours offline
Posted by nkawit, 09-29-2013, 01:58 PM WOW another migration?
Posted by BurstNET, 09-29-2013, 02:14 PM
"At this time services from our Miami DC are being migrated to a new site. As soon as our migration team can get the node that hosts you VPS back online the node should then proceed to boot your VPS. I am sorry, but at this time we do not have an ETA for when this will be completed."
4 hours offline
There is nothing unprofessional here whatsoever. In fact the exact opposite is true:
Multiple notices were sent out earlier this month about our new data center partnership in Miami, and relocation schedule for migration into this facility.
This was heavily planned and notices sent out well in advance.
This new facility will allow us more control overall, and allow us to offer better services and pricing in the expensive Miami market.
You were informed and you knew well about this...please do not act suprised to play to the WHT crowd.
PS - VPS nodes are being brought online current, and we are about to move on to the Dedicated Server relocation window.
Overall this is a small relocation project compared to our August PA facility move.
.
.
Posted by Mike V, 09-29-2013, 04:03 PM
Add to Favourites 
Print this Article
Also Read
