 
CyberSultan
Premium
join:2006-07-20 | Level 3 Issue This was an issue with their upstream provider, L3. I don't see how VT could do anything in this case except quickly escalate the issue to L3, which they did. Hopefully L3 gets their act together! | |
|
 | dcurrey
join:2004-06-29 | Re: Level 3 Issue If this was a Level3 issue shouldn't more providers show outages? | |
|
| | 
ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Hollywood, FL
clubs: | Re: Level 3 Issue Not necessarily. It could have been the connection between them that would not have effected other companies.
--
FWD#: 223611 | |
|
| |
| | 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Budd Lake, NJ
 ·Optimum Online
| Re: Level 3 Issue said by TexasPlus  :However outbound was out also. The CEO said it was related but should have been routed around. Don't these folks ever do a review of their system, or is ViaTalk still just one big Beta test? I tried them awhile ago. I wanted them to not suck since I do really like the features they offer over Vonage.
But after trying for a month or so I cancelled. They put their gateways on random half-ass providers that have connectivity that's not well-suited to voip. There doesn't really seem to be much tech/network talent there. It's also quite puzzling that they are owned by a hosting company yet choose to put all their servers outside of their own facilities.
Bizarre. | |
|
| | | |
| Russell_
join:2006-04-06
| said by CyberSultan :This was an issue with their upstream provider, L3. I don't see how VT could do anything in this case except quickly escalate the issue to L3, which they did. Hopefully L3 gets their act together! What's the basis for this claim? Not disbelieving you, but just wondering. Is there an official statement from ViaTalk to that effect?
--
Russell | |
|
| |
CyberSultan
Premium
join:2006-07-20
edit:
January 12th, @03:13AM
| Re: Level 3 Issue Brendan indicated this was an issue with their primary incoming carrier in the following post:
»Re: CS Number Disconnected
Their primary carrier is L3. They use a couple smaller carriers as well, but L3 is the primary. If you're looking for something more specific from VT other than what he said in his post, perhaps a VT rep will provide that (I always find asking nicely helps).
In any case, as for the incoming calls, they were not even reaching the VT network from L3 (I asked nicely about this).  I did not inquire as to issues with some people's outgoing calls. Hope this info helps. | |
|
| | | Russell_
join:2006-04-06
| Re: Level 3 Issue said by CyberSultan :Brendan indicated this was an issue with their primary incoming carrier in the following post: » Re: CS Number DisconnectedTheir primary carrier is L3. They use a couple smaller carriers as well, but L3 is the primary. If you're looking for something more specific from VT other than what he said in his post, perhaps a VT rep will provide that (I always find asking nicely helps). In any case, as for the incoming calls, they were not even reaching the VT network from L3 (I asked nicely about this). I did not inquire as to issues with some people's outgoing calls. Hope this info helps. Yes, I saw that post. Nothing in there says the issue is at Level 3's end and not ViaTalk's end. Your first message in this thread "Hopefully L3 gets their act together!" gives one the impression that this was a Level 3 issue. Hence my question as to what was the basis for that statement. Unless, there's a clear official statement from ViaTalk attributing the outage to problems at then Level 3 end, there's no basis to lay the blame on Level 3. Also, VT claimed that all had been fixed several HOURS before I and many others had phone service restored.
--
Russell | |
|
| | | |
CyberSultan
Premium
join:2006-07-20
edit:
January 12th, @12:19PM
| Re: Level 3 Issue As I don't post my PMs publicly, hopefully VT will give you the "official" answer you are looking for.  | |
|
| | | | | Russell_
join:2006-04-06
| Re: Level 3 Issue said by CyberSultan :As I don't post my PMs publicly, hopefully VT will give you the "official" answer you are looking for. I understand your not wanting to post PMs publicly. However, do note you've publicly said, "Hopefully L3 gets their act together!" thereby implying that L3 is responsible for this outage. Surely, if L3 was at fault, it would be in ViaTalk's best interest to state this and the very fact that they've not stated it leads me to believe that L3 is not the culprit here. Quite honestly VT's credibility is low (assuming your source is from VT) - VT claimed that all had been fixed hours before I and many others had phone service restored. I've always been impressed with your postings and helpfulness, sbradshaw (do note I do not use your first name publicly), but in this case your credibility is at stake.
--
Russell | |
|
| | | | | |
CyberSultan
Premium
join:2006-07-20
| Re: Level 3 Issue VT did officially state in this forum that this was a problem caused by their primary upstream provider. That's what I'm telling you. I know that their primary upstream provider is L3, and I was also told that it was L3 in this case.
So, I guess it no longer pays for me to share what I learn as my credibility is now at stake.  | |
|
| | | | | | | Russell_
join:2006-04-06
edit:
January 12th, @03:31PM
| Re: Level 3 Issue said by CyberSultan :VT did officially state in this forum that this was a problem caused by their primary upstream provider. That's what I'm telling you. I know that their primary upstream provider is L3, and I was also told that it was L3 in this case. So, I guess it no longer pays for me to share what I learn as my credibility is now at stake. Apologies, sbradshaw, for questioning your credibility. I didn't mean to "go after" you.
I was going strictly by ViaTalk's statement, which is the only official one (afaik):
"We are currently experiencing an upstream network wide issue effecting inbound calling. Network administrators are aware of this issue and are working to restore service as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience, and we apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you."
The first sentence can be interpreted in various ways (e.g. the piece of equipment /network which interfaces with an upstream provider has crapped out) and based on this official statement I couldn't see how one could conclude that it was L3's "fault" - hence my queries about the basis for your statements.
If the issue is indeed someone else's (please note I understand you genuinely believe so and your post reflects that) it's in VT's best interest to post (both in that very long DSLR thread and via the usual email mechanism) some kind of explanation in which the "blame" for the failure is clearly assigned. You appear to have a connection with certain people at VT - I'd encourage you to pass this feedback. In yesterday's case, the VT announcement that the issue was fixed was posted well before I (and many others) could receive incoming calls. Once again please pass feedback that such premature announcements do not enhance the credibility of their announcements.
Once again, apologies. You are indeed a genuinely helpful person on the VT forum and many of us have benefited from your expertise.
--
Russell | |
|
| | | | | | | |
CyberSultan
Premium
join:2006-07-20 | Re: Level 3 Issue Thanks! It's all good. | |
|
| xsiddalx
join:2005-03-11
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
| said by CyberSultan :This was an issue with their upstream provider, L3. I don't see how VT could do anything in this case except quickly escalate the issue to L3, which they did. Hopefully L3 gets their act together! VT could certainly have had a backup plan in place.
Depending on one provider? Isn't this the internet?
Hopefully VT gets it's act together! Selling service that you can't provide might be a long-term viability issue.
I hope L3's stock price makes sense some day! | |
|
| |
CyberSultan
Premium
join:2006-07-20
edit:
January 12th, @03:12AM
| Re: Level 3 Issue said by xsiddalx :said by CyberSultan :This was an issue with their upstream provider, L3. I don't see how VT could do anything in this case except quickly escalate the issue to L3, which they did. Hopefully L3 gets their act together! VT could certainly have had a backup plan in place. Depending on one provider? Isn't this the internet? I'm now curious as to what backup plan would you suggest they have? VT primarily gets their numbers from L3. It's not as easy as saying "L3 is currently experiencing issues, so let's move all those numbers over to carrier Y". L3 is a major player. VT would not be the only provider using them. | |
|
| | |
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Budd Lake, NJ
·Optimum Online
| Re: Level 3 Issue said by CyberSultan :I'm now curious as to what backup plan would you suggest they have? VT primarily gets their numbers from L3. It's not as easy as saying "L3 is currently experiencing issues, so let's move all those numbers over to carrier Y". L3 is a major player. VT would not be the only provider using them. So odd that the two folks I deal with for VoIP both use L3 yet they had no problems. | |
|
| | | |
CyberSultan
Premium
join:2006-07-20 | Re: Level 3 Issue It was probably just the connection then between L3 and VT. I don't know what that architecture looks like. | |
|
| | |
| 
koam
Pink Pecker
Premium
join:2000-08-16
East Puddle
clubs: | Blaming the supplier is exactly what SunRocket did. We pay VT to make sure that they hire reliable suppliers and have backups. Let's not apologize for VT and let them pass the buck. | |
|
| | 
esc0
@swbell.net | Re: Level 3 Issue I am glad I left VT when the influx of ex-SR users came over. From that day service started to go down. I have been happy with my new provider. | |
|
| | |
JoePolcari
@charter.com | Re: Level 3 Issue esc0, who did you switch to? | |
|
| |
| | NY Tel
Premium
join:2004-04-09
Smithtown, NY
 ·VOIPo
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Level 3 Issue said by supergirl :said by CyberSultan :This was an issue with their upstream provider, L3. I don't see how VT could do anything in this case except quickly escalate the issue to L3, which they did. Hopefully L3 gets their act together! Maybe VTBrendan didn't pay their L3 bill?  Does anyone else get the feeling that this could be the case and that this is "Sunrocket" all over again? | |
|
hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs: | Opps Not everything has 100 percent up time, i dont care what it is. | |
|
| 
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
| Re: Opps My POTS is up 100% of the time. You can give me all of the song and dance about VOIP, but 100+ years of proven communication does not lie!
It reminds me of these kids I see walking around listening to mp3s on their cell phones. Sure the technology's there, but it dosen't sound any better than the transistor radios from the early '70s.
(I know, a real mp3 player blows the cell phones away)
--
Let's pluck 'im and see if he's ripe!"
- Larry (MEN IN BLACK, 1934) | |
|
| | DMS1
join:2005-04-06
Carrollton, TX
| Re: Opps said by S_engineer :My POTS is up 100% of the time. Not for ever it won't be. Telco systems are typically designed to support 4-nines (99.99%) end-to-end reliability, which means on average it will be out for just under an hour a year. | |
|
| | | 
CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
·Speakeasy
| Re: Opps said by DMS1 :said by S_engineer :My POTS is up 100% of the time. Not for ever it won't be. Telco systems are typically designed to support 4-nines (99.99%) end-to-end reliability, which means on average it will be out for just under an hour a year. Then again - my pots has not been down for 5 minumtes for ohhhhhh... 15 years - literally. | |
|
| | | |
ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Hollywood, FL
clubs:
| Re: Opps said by CylonRed :said by DMS1 :said by S_engineer :My POTS is up 100% of the time. Not for ever it won't be. Telco systems are typically designed to support 4-nines (99.99%) end-to-end reliability, which means on average it will be out for just under an hour a year. Then again - my pots has not been down for 5 minumtes for ohhhhhh... 15 years - literally. U sure about that?? I doubt you have been on it 24x7 for the past, ohhhh, 15 years to know.
--
FWD#: 223611 | |
|
| | | | 
SquareSlinky
Premium
join:2004-05-25
Tampa, FL
·ViaTalk
| Maybe you have been lucky, although that number is a slight exageration. My pots line had a short in it, it was beyond the box and somewhere in the house. I used to lose my line for days at a time whenever moisture was in the air. Days and days without a phone. The phone company told me it was my responsibility to repair because it was on the other side of the box. After many repairs, one of the more helpful techs noticed an exposed wire about 4 inches above the box where a rodent bit the line. VOIP has its issues, sure. It is also a lot cheaper and I have a cell phone for backup. | |
|
| | | | | 
dsldude08
Premium
join:2008-01-03
La Crosse, WI
·CenturyTel Inc.
| Re: Opps Cell phones are convenient, that's it. I hope you realize that cell phones tend to be less reliable than a land line or cable phone or VOIP, even though it seems most people are canceling their land line to go to just cell phone.
Downsides to cell phone only:
In most counties/parishes they do not have the technology to physically locate a person when they dial 911. The GPS built into a cell phone is essentially useless in this case. I know of ONE county in my area that has it and it's not the one I live in. Even then, it's not guranteed.
Cell phone batteries are short lived, so if you have no way to charge it, you are SOL.
Call quality on a cell phone is deeply degraded when it is compared to other phone services.
There are more, but it is important to point this out to those who are on cell phone only...»www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories200···pot.html
Pretty scary stuff.
--
"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
- Abraham Lincoln | |
|
| | |
| | |
See 15 replies to this post |
|
| | |
| | |
GregM
@echostar.com
| The problem seems to be bigger than they're letting on to... I had several calls to my wife at home drop mid-sentence. One attempt to call her back the phone didn't ring and I was listening to both sides of a customer service call. I heard her say hello once but nothing else, she could hear me the whole time, yet she couldn't hear the other conversation that I was listening to. | |
|
bmize13
join:2006-04-17
Dallas, GA
·ViaTalk
| Definitely bigger... I did receive a message from VT Support stating that my service had been restored some 40 minutes ago. Not one time in the 30 or so attempts I've made during the interim have I successfully received anything other than the disconnected message.
Very obviously, something is not right. | |
|
CCNnorthcali
join:2004-03-07
Tempe, AZ
clubs: | No problems here... How funny. I didn't even know they were having problems. Have been making calls just fine through the Houston server. I guess I'm just lucky. | |
|
|
CyberSultan
Premium
join:2006-07-20
| Re: No problems here... said by CCNnorthcali :How funny. I didn't even know they were having problems. Have been making calls just fine through the Houston server. I guess I'm just lucky. It's possible your number is with one of their other upstream providers. L3 is the main provider for VT, with a few others in the mix. | |
|
| tzbf2007
join:2008-01-07
Canal Winchester, OH | So far, I have not had any problems dialing out or receiving calls in. | |
|
| dcurrey
join:2004-06-29
·ViaTalk
edit:
January 11th, @08:34PM
| Only reason I knew about the outage was from this website. When we got home the wife called her mom and I went online. She talked for 51 minutes no problem. I did inbound and outbound after she got off no problems. Pretty sure my number is from Level 3 | |
|
|
JoePolcari
@charter.com | What's the Houston server's FQDN? | |
|
koam
Pink Pecker
Premium
join:2000-08-16
East Puddle
clubs: | issues Unfortunately, VT has been focusing on coming up with new services, like "fax to email for a fee" rather than getting its house in order on basic phone service reliability. | |
|
jgkolt
Premium
join:2004-02-21
Lakewood, OH
clubs: | i hope they get it togather from what i hear people liked their service best out of the bunch before sunrocket went belly up
--
3 free for you/3 free for me: Free Stock Trades : PM Me | |
|
Techie714
join:2005-08-02
Anaheim, CA |  Viatalk
| |
|
kyler13
Is your fiber grounded?
join:2006-12-12
Arnold, MD
·ViaTalk
·Verizon FIOS
| As usual, I'm a best case The worst problem we've experienced through this recent ViaTalk problem was not being able to receive inbound calls from our Verizon Wireless cell phones (I couldn't call home, got fast busy signal). Outbound worked, and other cell providers and landlines had no problem getting through. In 12 months with VT, I've never gone down completely and this minor glitch is probably the third problem I've experienced, none of which ever really impacted my service. | |
|
Tim618
join:2003-10-14
Garrettsville, OH | yep my pots line was garbage. I agree that VT should focus soley on getting their service to an acceptable level before doing anything else. | |
|
AnonProxy
Proxy of Anon
Premium
join:2001-05-12
ß |  It is ENTIRELY VT's fault
| |
|
| |
| | 
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: It is ENTIRELY VT's fault said by espaeth :said by AnonProxy :No redundancy, no second point of access for customers...shame on them! In the event of an outage of your budget Internet phone service, which relies on a public best-effort IP network with no SLAs... What, you mean my telephone service that I pay $8.33/month for two years doesn't guarantee five 9's uptime? Say it ain't so. | |
|
| | | jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville | Re: It is ENTIRELY VT's fault Hah ! This is one of the most intelligent posts in this thread !! | |
|
bloodx
join:2002-08-25
North Myrtle Beach, SC | ? It's amazing how people complain about a lower cost service not performing like a premium $ one. Viatalk is a
great product for people who don't need 100% up time. If you need that then you are an idiot for using them. | |
|
| |
| |
kyler13
Is your fiber grounded?
join:2006-12-12
Arnold, MD
·ViaTalk
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: ? said by prestonlewis :As for the POTS vs. VoIP argument, VoIP does not make the promise of the five nines that telcos do (99.999% up time). That's one reason why telcos must charge you more (they do promise or usually promise the five nines). And there lies the irony. The bare cost of POTS service itself is actually quite competitive with VoIP. It's the taxes, fees, and surcharges which have nothing to do with your uptime that makes landline so much more expensive. You don't pay for the reliability. It was mandated decades ago by the government and has been fortified over all those years. The day they apply state, federal, local taxes equally to VoIP is the day the technology dies. Of course, this won't apply to providers that own their own networks (cablecos). | |
|
|
|
|
Viatalk Having Troubles
·
