Anyone having problems sending and receiving emails using Plusnet-based
addresses?

It seems to be running very slowly, and some emails have gone missing.
--
Cheers,
Roger

Roger Mills wrote:

> Anyone having problems sending and receiving emails using Plusnet-based
> addresses?
>
> It seems to be running very slowly, and some emails have gone missing.

Yes, I've just posted similar to p.s.customer-feedback

I've only noticed sending being slow, not noticed receiving being slow
(maybe it is but I haven't noticed) not noticed anything going astray.

On 17/08/2023 09:00, Andy Burns wrote:
> Roger Mills wrote:
>
>> Anyone having problems sending and receiving emails using
>> Plusnet-based addresses?
>>
>> It seems to be running very slowly, and some emails have gone missing.
>
> Yes, I've just posted similar to p.s.customer-feedback
>
> I've only noticed sending being slow, not noticed receiving being slow
> (maybe it is but I haven't noticed) not noticed anything going astray.

There have been some issues over the last 24 hours or so but I'm led to
believe things are now on the mend.

I haven't been close to things but I suspect it was a client access
issue, in which case no inbound mail should have been lost.

--
|Bob Pullen Award-winning broadband
|Support ADSL/VDSL/FTTP
|Plusnet Plc. www.plus.net
+--------------- twitter.com/plusnet ----------------

Plusnet Support Team wrote:

> There have been some issues over the last 24 hours or so but I'm led to
> believe things are now on the mend.

Thanks Bob.

Has the concept of having a service status page gone now?

"Andy Burns" <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote in message
news:kk6r3bFaskvU3@mid.individual.net...
> Plusnet Support Team wrote:
>
>> There have been some issues over the last 24 hours or so but I'm led to
>> believe things are now on the mend.
>
> Thanks Bob.
>
> Has the concept of having a service status page gone now?

My experience of service status pages (in general, not specifically PN's) is
that they often show "OK" even when there is manifestly a widespread
problem. One of the problems in a lot of cases is that there isn't the
reporting granularity: there may be a problem with sending or receiving
email or with a newsgroup server, but it all gets lumped in with "broadband"
and on average the DSL connectivity for the majority is fine and swamps the
email problem that is intermittently affecting a smaller number of people.
Again, in general, not specifically PN.

NY wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> Has the concept of having a service status page gone now?
>
> My experience of service status pages (in general, not specifically
> PN's) is that they often show "OK" even when there is manifestly a
> widespread problem.

The problem is that if an ISP's own status page goes away, then people
tend to use "anything available" instead such as DownDetector, which
tends to be a bit meaningless, all problem reports on a map boil down to
population density, it must be shit to live in London all services
report problems there all the time ...

> One of the problems in a lot of cases is that there
> isn't the reporting granularity: there may be a problem with sending or
> receiving email or with a newsgroup server, but it all gets lumped in
> with "broadband" and on average the DSL connectivity for the majority is
> fine and swamps the email problem that is intermittently affecting a
> smaller number of people. Again, in general, not specifically PN.

Red/Amber/Green for broadband, email, usenet, web hosting, dns, voip etc
have been done in the past ...

On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 11:17:48 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
wrote:

>The problem is that if an ISP's own status page goes away, then people
>tend to use "anything available" instead such as DownDetector, which
>tends to be a bit meaningless, all problem reports on a map boil down to
>population density, it must be shit to live in London all services
>report problems there all the time ...

I guess that's where the Daily Mail reporter who deals with this sort
of thing must live then, because DownDetector is what they always
show, and typically a few hours after the issue has been fixed.

Rod.

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> NY wrote:
>
> > Andy Burns wrote:
> >
> >> Has the concept of having a service status page gone now?
> >
> > My experience of service status pages (in general, not specifically
> > PN's) is that they often show "OK" even when there is manifestly a
> > widespread problem.
>
> The problem is that if an ISP's own status page goes away, then people
> tend to use "anything available" instead such as DownDetector, which
> tends to be a bit meaningless, all problem reports on a map boil down to
> population density, it must be shit to live in London all services
> report problems there all the time ...
>
> > One of the problems in a lot of cases is that there
> > isn't the reporting granularity: there may be a problem with sending or
> > receiving email or with a newsgroup server, but it all gets lumped in
> > with "broadband" and on average the DSL connectivity for the majority is
> > fine and swamps the email problem that is intermittently affecting a
> > smaller number of people. Again, in general, not specifically PN.
>
> Red/Amber/Green for broadband, email, usenet, web hosting, dns, voip etc
> have been done in the past ...

It's useful to have somewhere that says what the ISP expects the situation
to be: eg planned maintenance affecting services X/Y/Z, compared with
unplanned issues where the status should be green but isn't. For example,
AA have a status page which is linked to their ticketing system that shows
jobs in progress:
https://aastatus.net/

(somebody mirrors this to the uk.net.providers.aaisp newsgroup)

By being public, it also means there is visibility of the notes on an
unplanned fault (not just 'we're working on it', but a more technical
description, with updates)

I also like their 'blip graph' which shows logins and logouts to their
servers: if lots of customers are being logged out (eg their ADSL goes down)
that suggests a widespread problem.

Another source for info would be Twitter, but Twitter has become
increasingly unreliable for publically spreading live info.

Theo

On 19 Aug 2023 10:34:44 +0100 (BST)
Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> Another source for info would be Twitter, but Twitter has become
> increasingly unreliable for publically spreading live info.

And possibly spreading false info. I wouldn't touch 'X' with a
barge-pole.

--
Davey.

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Andy Burns" <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote in message
> news:kk6r3bFaskvU3@mid.individual.net...
>> Plusnet Support Team wrote:
>>
>>> There have been some issues over the last 24 hours or so but I'm led to
>>> believe things are now on the mend.
>>
>> Thanks Bob.
>>
>> Has the concept of having a service status page gone now?
>
> My experience of service status pages (in general, not specifically PN's) is
> that they often show "OK" even when there is manifestly a widespread
> problem. One of the problems in a lot of cases is that there isn't the
> reporting granularity: there may be a problem with sending or receiving
> email or with a newsgroup server, but it all gets lumped in with "broadband"
> and on average the DSL connectivity for the majority is fine and swamps the
> email problem that is intermittently affecting a smaller number of people.
> Again, in general, not specifically PN.

Ideally, a status page should be "live" and reflect the real status of the
service, however, they are mostly gatekeepered by a human. That's why they
don't reflect users' experience.