🚀 go-pugleaf

Martin Underwood wrote:

> Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the electricity
> supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the supply to specific
> floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear the costs). Either way, I
> hope Force 9 and the other affected companies take the guilty party to the
> cleaners... and then buy proper UPSes and emergency generators with the
> compensation money.

An ISP such as Plusnet should really have diverse power feeds, *and* a
proper UPS.

Anyway, didn't exactly the same thing happen less than a year ago ?

"Den" <do@notreply> wrote in message news:44e44940.0@entanet...
> The damn thing has been down since before 8.30 am this morning. Can't even
> access via dial up. The first 2 hours each morning are our busiest time
> and we can't be contacted AGAIN. The bloody web site is down so people
> can't even access our phone number
> Anyone recommend an alternative unlimited access that also provides
> hosting?

you're lucky. our one has been offline for 3 weeks now.  i can't even call
them on the phone and they take so long to respond on their online support.

Den wrote:
> The damn thing has been down since before 8.30 am this morning. Can't even
> access via dial up. The first 2 hours each morning are our busiest time and
> we can't be contacted AGAIN. The bloody web site is down so people can't
> even access our phone number
> Anyone recommend an alternative unlimited access that also provides hosting?
>
>

Seems to have been caused by a power outage at Telehouse North - see
thread "Poor old plusnet users" above.

A

> The damn thing has been down since before 8.30 am this morning. Can't
> even access via dial up. The first 2 hours each morning are our
> busiest time and we can't be contacted AGAIN. The bloody web site is
> down so people can't even access our phone number
> Anyone recommend an alternative unlimited access that also provides
> hosting?

The reason is a major power failure and attendant problems at Telehouse
North. Not something within Plusnet's ability to resolve easily. Lots of
other organisations affected as well. Look before you leap!

Peter Crosland

Peter Crosland wrote in
44e473b4$0$3209$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net:

>> The damn thing has been down since before 8.30 am this morning. Can't
>> even access via dial up. The first 2 hours each morning are our
>> busiest time and we can't be contacted AGAIN. The bloody web site is
>> down so people can't even access our phone number
>> Anyone recommend an alternative unlimited access that also provides
>> hosting?
>
> The reason is a major power failure and attendant problems at
> Telehouse North. Not something within Plusnet's ability to resolve
> easily. Lots of other organisations affected as well. Look before you
> leap!

Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the electricity
supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the supply to specific
floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear the costs). Either way, I
hope Force 9 and the other affected companies take the guilty party to the
cleaners... and then buy proper UPSes and emergency generators with the
compensation money.

Mark Carver wrote in
1155825731.109936.217050@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> Martin Underwood wrote:
>
>> Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the
>> electricity supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the
>> supply to specific floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear
>> the costs). Either way, I hope Force 9 and the other affected
>> companies take the guilty party to the cleaners... and then buy
>> proper UPSes and emergency generators with the compensation money.
>
> An ISP such as Plusnet should really have diverse power feeds, *and* a
> proper UPS.

Diverse feeds would only help if it was a problem inside the building,
unless Telehouse have got connections to more than one National Grid
substation. A UPS woudl help to tide them over for a little while but a long
term power cut (of more than a few minutes) is better covered by an
emergency generator than a UPS with several hours' battery life.

> Anyway, didn't exactly the same thing happen less than a year ago ?

Probably. They seem to have had a lot of "bad luck" over the past couple of
years: various power cuts, loss of some or all web sites that they host,
loss of email servers and the email data. Etc etc. Up to now I've
recommended Force 9 to my customers who want a good ISP. I'm in two minds as
to whether I can still in all honesty recommend them - even though if I do
so I get 50p/month/customer discount off my own bill! At least so far Force
9 have resisted the "Indian call centre" plague on their support lines.

> Mark Carver wrote in
> 1155825731.109936.217050@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Martin Underwood wrote:
>>
>>> Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the
>>> electricity supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the
>>> supply to specific floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear
>>> the costs). Either way, I hope Force 9 and the other affected
>>> companies take the guilty party to the cleaners... and then buy
>>> proper UPSes and emergency generators with the compensation money.
>>
>> An ISP such as Plusnet should really have diverse power feeds, *and* a
>> proper UPS.
>
> Diverse feeds would only help if it was a problem inside the building,
> unless Telehouse have got connections to more than one National Grid
> substation. A UPS woudl help to tide them over for a little while but a
> long term power cut (of more than a few minutes) is better covered by an
> emergency generator than a UPS with several hours' battery life.
>
>> Anyway, didn't exactly the same thing happen less than a year ago ?
>
> Probably. They seem to have had a lot of "bad luck" over the past couple
> of years: various power cuts, loss of some or all web sites that they
> host, loss of email servers and the email data. Etc etc. Up to now I've
> recommended Force 9 to my customers who want a good ISP. I'm in two minds
> as to whether I can still in all honesty recommend them - even though if I
> do so I get 50p/month/customer discount off my own bill! At least so far
> Force 9 have resisted the "Indian call centre" plague on their support
> lines.
Force 9 IS plusnet isn't it? The Force9 and PlusNet web sites are identical
and is the same and our web site DNS is Force9

Den wrote in
44e48ac5$0$2692$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net:

>> Mark Carver wrote in
>> 1155825731.109936.217050@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> Martin Underwood wrote:
>>>
>> Probably. They seem to have had a lot of "bad luck" over the past
>> couple of years: various power cuts, loss of some or all web sites
>> that they host, loss of email servers and the email data. Etc etc.
>> Up to now I've recommended Force 9 to my customers who want a good
>> ISP. I'm in two minds as to whether I can still in all honesty
>> recommend them - even though if I do so I get 50p/month/customer
>> discount off my own bill! At least so far Force 9 have resisted the
>> "Indian call centre" plague on their support lines.
> Force 9 IS plusnet isn't it? The Force9 and PlusNet web sites are
> identical and is the same and our web site DNS is Force9

Yes I realise that they are. Perhaps I should have made that clearer. I was
simply meaning that my experience is with Force 9 and that's all I can
comment directly on, but I know F9 are a subsidiary of PlusNet and so any
problems that PN have will also affect F9.

ian wrote:

> "Den" <do@notreply> wrote in message news:44e44940.0@entanet...
> > The damn thing has been down since before 8.30 am this morning. Can't even
> > access via dial up. The first 2 hours each morning are our busiest time
> > and we can't be contacted AGAIN. The bloody web site is down so people
> > can't even access our phone number
> > Anyone recommend an alternative unlimited access that also provides
> > hosting?
>
> you're lucky. our one has been offline for 3 weeks now.  i can't even call
> them on the phone and they take so long to respond on their online support.

What are you doing about it ?

Graham

Martin Underwood wrote:

> Mark Carver wrote in
> 1155825731.109936.217050@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> > Martin Underwood wrote:
> >
> >> Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the
> >> electricity supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the
> >> supply to specific floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear
> >> the costs). Either way, I hope Force 9 and the other affected
> >> companies take the guilty party to the cleaners... and then buy
> >> proper UPSes and emergency generators with the compensation money.
> >
> > An ISP such as Plusnet should really have diverse power feeds, *and* a
> > proper UPS.
>
> Diverse feeds would only help if it was a problem inside the building,
> unless Telehouse have got connections to more than one National Grid
> substation. A UPS woudl help to tide them over for a little while but a long
> term power cut (of more than a few minutes) is better covered by an
> emergency generator than a UPS with several hours' battery life.
>
> > Anyway, didn't exactly the same thing happen less than a year ago ?
>
> Probably. They seem to have had a lot of "bad luck" over the past couple of
> years: various power cuts, loss of some or all web sites that they host,
> loss of email servers and the email data. Etc etc. Up to now I've
> recommended Force 9 to my customers who want a good ISP. I'm in two minds as
> to whether I can still in all honesty recommend them - even though if I do
> so I get 50p/month/customer discount off my own bill! At least so far Force
> 9 have resisted the "Indian call centre" plague on their support lines.

Can you get through to speak to them though ? I can't raise Plenet's support
unless I phone very early in the morning.

I'm moving to Idnet btw. They'l give you a £10 lump sum for referral and the new
customer gets one too !

Graham

"Martin Underwood" <a@b> wrote in message
news:44e47728$0$3617$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
> Peter Crosland wrote in
> 44e473b4$0$3209$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net:
>
>>> The damn thing has been down since before 8.30 am this morning. Can't
>>> even access via dial up. The first 2 hours each morning are our
>>> busiest time and we can't be contacted AGAIN. The bloody web site is
>>> down so people can't even access our phone number
>>> Anyone recommend an alternative unlimited access that also provides
>>> hosting?
>>
>> The reason is a major power failure and attendant problems at
>> Telehouse North. Not something within Plusnet's ability to resolve
>> easily. Lots of other organisations affected as well. Look before you
>> leap!
>
> Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the
> electricity supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the supply
> to specific floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear the costs).
> Either way, I hope Force 9 and the other affected companies take the
> guilty party to the cleaners... and then buy proper UPSes and emergency
> generators with the compensation money.
The problem with back-up systems, particularly power supplies, is that there
has to be a common point at which switching takes place. If a failure takes
place at this point, you get an even bigger bang! And to maintain the
switch, everything has to be isolated.
I write from personal experience with an organisation which had triplicated
systems!
Which is why I'm glad I

Retired

Martin Underwood wrote:
>>The reason is a major power failure and attendant problems at
>>Telehouse North. Not something within Plusnet's ability to resolve
>>easily. Lots of other organisations affected as well.
> Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the electricity
> supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the supply to specific
> floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear the costs).

AIUI one phase of a three-phase cable failed. ISPs could either move
their equipment on to the other two phases, or shut down to prevent data
loss. Telehouse then had to shut off the power completely to replace the
affected cable.

> Either way, I
> hope Force 9 and the other affected companies take the guilty party to the
> cleaners... and then buy proper UPSes and emergency generators with the
> compensation money.

You've still got to get the power to the racks though.

Owain

Owain wrote:

> Martin Underwood wrote:
> >>The reason is a major power failure and attendant problems at
> >>Telehouse North. Not something within Plusnet's ability to resolve
> >>easily. Lots of other organisations affected as well.
> > Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the electricity
> > supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the supply to specific
> > floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear the costs).
>
> AIUI one phase of a three-phase cable failed. ISPs could either move
> their equipment on to the other two phases, or shut down to prevent data
> loss. Telehouse then had to shut off the power completely to replace the
> affected cable.

I find it very odd that one phase supposedly *burnt out*. That's virually unknown
in the UK and should actually not be possible if wiring is correctly installed.

Graham

In article <44e49a39$0$3583$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>,
	"Retired" <anon@privacy.com> writes:
> The problem with back-up systems, particularly power supplies, is that there
> has to be a common point at which switching takes place. If a failure takes
> place at this point, you get an even bigger bang! And to maintain the
> switch, everything has to be isolated.

There are plenty of computers, routers, switches, etc which take
multiple redundant power feeds, so this is not necessarily an
issue.

The problem with back-up systems is they are an extra layer of
complexity. That complexity doesn't automatically get you a more
reliable system, indeed often the extra complexity drags down
the reliability of a system. You really need to understand what
you are doing to make a more complex system more reliable than
the sum of its parts, and that's a skill in seemingly short
supply. I've lost count of the number of UPS (and other systems
intended to deliver higher availability) I've come across which
would actually deliver higher availability if they simply
weren't there in the first place, due to poor design, poor
maintenance, or lack of understanding of the system by those
using it.

I don't know the circumstances of the Telehouse incident, but
a burned out phase (which is the most technical description
I've seen) would tend to point towards poor design
(overloading) or poor maintenance (lack of monitoring for hot
spots), although the situation might well be quite different
from the limited info which has thus far floated around.

--
Andrew Gabriel

On 19 Aug 2006 10:04:33 GMT, andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew
Gabriel) wrote:

>In article <44e49a39$0$3583$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>,
>	"Retired" <anon@privacy.com> writes:
>> The problem with back-up systems, particularly power supplies, is that there
>> has to be a common point at which switching takes place. If a failure takes
>> place at this point, you get an even bigger bang! And to maintain the
>> switch, everything has to be isolated.
>
>There are plenty of computers, routers, switches, etc which take
>multiple redundant power feeds, so this is not necessarily an
>issue.
>
>The problem with back-up systems is they are an extra layer of
>complexity. That complexity doesn't automatically get you a more
>reliable system, indeed often the extra complexity drags down
>the reliability of a system. You really need to understand what
>you are doing to make a more complex system more reliable than
>the sum of its parts, and that's a skill in seemingly short
>supply. I've lost count of the number of UPS (and other systems
>intended to deliver higher availability) I've come across which
>would actually deliver higher availability if they simply
>weren't there in the first place, due to poor design, poor
>maintenance, or lack of understanding of the system by those
>using it.
>
>I don't know the circumstances of the Telehouse incident, but
>a burned out phase (which is the most technical description
>I've seen) would tend to point towards poor design
>(overloading) or poor maintenance (lack of monitoring for hot
>spots), although the situation might well be quite different
>from the limited info which has thus far floated around.

Which all points to incopetency, basically

jim

jim wrote:
>
> Which all points to incopetency, basically
>


lol
--
huLLy

"jim" <jmacduff9743@notthis.hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hmgee2hh52d8brmdshi6dshrm2e9fif9vp@4ax.com...
> On 19 Aug 2006 10:04:33 GMT, andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew
> Gabriel) wrote:
>
>>In article <44e49a39$0$3583$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>,
>> "Retired" <anon@privacy.com> writes:
>>> The problem with back-up systems, particularly power supplies, is that
>>> there
>>> has to be a common point at which switching takes place. If a failure
>>> takes
>>> place at this point, you get an even bigger bang! And to maintain the
>>> switch, everything has to be isolated.
>>
>>There are plenty of computers, routers, switches, etc which take
>>multiple redundant power feeds, so this is not necessarily an
>>issue.
>>
>>The problem with back-up systems is they are an extra layer of
>>complexity. That complexity doesn't automatically get you a more
>>reliable system, indeed often the extra complexity drags down
>>the reliability of a system. You really need to understand what
>>you are doing to make a more complex system more reliable than
>>the sum of its parts, and that's a skill in seemingly short
>>supply. I've lost count of the number of UPS (and other systems
>>intended to deliver higher availability) I've come across which
>>would actually deliver higher availability if they simply
>>weren't there in the first place, due to poor design, poor
>>maintenance, or lack of understanding of the system by those
>>using it.
>>
>>I don't know the circumstances of the Telehouse incident, but
>>a burned out phase (which is the most technical description
>>I've seen) would tend to point towards poor design
>>(overloading) or poor maintenance (lack of monitoring for hot
>>spots), although the situation might well be quite different
>>from the limited info which has thus far floated around.
>
> Which all points to incopetency, basically

Lol !!
So Jim ... how many times have you been to Telehouse ?

"Owain" <owain47125@stirlingcity.coo.uk> wrote in message
news:1155848141.26548.4@proxy02.news.clara.net...
> Martin Underwood wrote:
>>>The reason is a major power failure and attendant problems at
>>>Telehouse North. Not something within Plusnet's ability to resolve
>>>easily. Lots of other organisations affected as well.
>> Was it failure of the supply to the building (in which case the
>> electricity supply company should bear the cost) or failure of the supply
>> to specific floors/rooms (in which case Telehouse should bear the costs).
>
> AIUI one phase of a three-phase cable failed.

No it didn't.
A connection burnt out, not a cable


 > ISPs could either move their equipment on to the other two phases,

Really ?
What you mean just unplug the rack/s and plug into another socket on a
different phase ?   Lol