Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links


Categories

In this Discussion

› › Online.net - AVOID - Chargeback
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Online.net - AVOID - Chargeback

stefemanstefeman Member
edited August 2017 in General

So I bought their Dedibox® SC 2016 few days ago. https://www.online.net/en/dedicated-server/dedibox-sc AMS1 Datacenter

I noticed network issues instantly after receiving it and made a support ticket.

(It was running on port 5202 which the support failed to mention, solved and tested later)

(iperf3 on their AMS1 testserver. The results are good..)

(But my server still still sucks)

(Their internal connectivity is fine though.)

(This idiot runs the same internal connection test I did before, and somehow concludes that the network is fine even when it leaves their datacenter)

(At this point, I kinda thought it couldn't get worse so I decided to go sleep as my ticket was now closed.)

Today the server was still on rescue mode. even my SSH lagged so I asked my friend with another ISP to test it out.

At this point I terminated my 2 days old server and gave it back to the pool for the next unfortunate and filed a chargeback on paypal and created another ticket. cause I'm not paying the server + 20€ setup fee for that

Heres your drama for august.

«1

Comments

  • trvztrvz Member

    You get what you pay for.

  • stefemanstefeman Member
    edited August 2017

    @trvz said:
    You get what you pay for.

    I didin't pay for 200 Kbps port. That's shit for the money even on Asia standards. xD

    Thanked by 1GamerTech24
  • trvztrvz Member

    stefeman said: I didin't pay for 200 Kbps port.

    Not with the chargeback you didn't.

  • stefemanstefeman Member
    edited August 2017

    @trvz said:

    stefeman said: I didin't pay for 200 Kbps port.

    Not with the chargeback you didn't.

    I paid 30€. The speed was 200Kbps.

    Which is why I chargebacked after all negotiations failed and the host refused to acknowledge or further investigate the problem.

    In this situation it's the correct thing to do. If they had fixed the issue, provided me with a replacement server, or even allowed me to buy one from another DC without setup fees, they could've had that 30€ and very likely even more in the coming months.

    I had friend in germany to try it as well, and he had similar speeds so it's not related to routing or by country as both of us were able to get full port from ping-ams1.online.net

  • RizRiz Member
    edited August 2017

    I'm not surprised, their support isn't technical from what I experienced.

    I find it interesting in your 5th screenshot the route is using telia one way, and cogent the other. That's what it would push me to look at possibly. All it takes is one bastard downloading Linux isos and the whole switch is kapooy.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited August 2017

    yeah fair enough.

    I was expecting some ridiculous logic but looks like you made a fair point, certainly enough for them to take ownership of it.

    Unless I am mistaken, you proved the speed was bad for the WAN, showed it was fine on the LAN, they tested it on the LAN and said it works fine and that was as far as they could get... genius.

    edit: sorry am I missing something, I can't see any proof that you did actually test it in rescue mode which is kind of important?

    Thanked by 1Tom
  • PUSHR_VictorPUSHR_Victor Member, Host Rep

    That's not the end of your drama. You did a chargeback, now expect the nonsense bailiff threats.

  • stefemanstefeman Member
    edited August 2017

    @AnthonySmith said:
    yeah fair enough.

    edit: sorry am I missing something, I can't see any proof that you did actually test it in rescue mode which is kind of important?

    Luckily they still haven't deleted the server even when I marked it as deleted.

    Here's your proof/graphs.


    Looks like its a little faster again but still under 370 KB/s

    Here's a comprasion to their looking glass/ping server in same location.

    edit: and more..

  • stefemanstefeman Member

    The server is gone now.

  • stefemanstefeman Member
    edited August 2017

    For testing I used:

    Iperf3 binaries for Windows cmd: https://iperf.fr/

    and

    Ubuntu Bash / Linux subsystem on Windows 10

    And my friends used full Ubuntu/Debian.

    So there shouldn't be an issue on my side with the iperf3 results

  • lusirhelusirhe Member

    Online drama part 2.

    Got a server which would turn off daily in the last 3 days, so I asked a hardware check.
    They locked my server (without letting me save my data), provided a "new" server.

    Speeds great, hdd nice, just that the CPU is haved.

    root@whitesmokes:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'model name' | uniq 
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1230 V2 @ 3.30GHz 

root@whitesmokes:~# grep -c processor /proc/cpuinfo
4

root@whitesmokes:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep processor 
processor : 0 
processor : 1 
processor : 2 
processor : 3 

root@whitesmokes:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'core id' 
core id : 0 
core id : 1 
core id : 2 
core id : 3

    Shoudn't this have 8 logical cores (2 logical cores per physical)?

  • WSSWSS Member

    That depends on what you paid for. If it was HVH, you'd have half a core at 800Mhz.

    Thanked by 1FredQc
  • levnodelevnode Member

    You are comparing 2 servers at different datacenter. The IP range 51.15.x.x is in AMS which is currently at maximum bandwidth. They are planning to upgrade the bandwidth in AMS. The IP range 163.172 is definitely in DC2. I have about 50 servers with them, all in DC2 and DC3 and their networks are quite good.

    I think you are right for chargeback since you are eligible for it. But why don't you test the connection before buying?

  • stefemanstefeman Member
    edited August 2017

    @levnode said:
    You are comparing 2 servers at different datacenter. The IP range 51.15.x.x is in AMS which is currently at maximum bandwidth. They are planning to upgrade the bandwidth in AMS. The IP range 163.172 is definitely in DC2. I have about 50 servers with them, all in DC2 and DC3 and their networks are quite good.

    I think you are right for chargeback since you are eligible for it. But why don't you test the connection before buying?

    I did, look at the fucking domain would you? If it says ams1 and gives me over 70Mbps, I expect my server to be somewhat same too.

    It makes no sense for them to put ping-ams1.online.net to france DC2 location. Most likely its geoip or localized. On top of that I have normal speeds to another server in same hallway as mine.

  • levnodelevnode Member
    edited August 2017

    @stefeman said:

    @levnode said:
    You are comparing 2 servers at different datacenter. The IP range 51.15.x.x is in AMS which is currently at maximum bandwidth. They are planning to upgrade the bandwidth in AMS. The IP range 163.172 is definitely in DC2. I have about 50 servers with them, all in DC2 and DC3 and their networks are quite good.

    I think you are right for chargeback since you are eligible for it. But why don't you test the connection before buying?

    I did, look at the fucking domain would you? If it says ams1 and gives me over 70Mbps, I expect my server to be somewhat same too.

    It makes no sense for them to put ping-ams1.online.net to france DC2 location. Most likely its geoip or localized. On top of that I have normal speeds to another server in same hallway as mine.

    My mistake, sorry. They are allocating the range 163.172.x.x to AMS also. So I think there's issue with your routing from your PC to the IP range 51.15.x.x. Have you tried traceroute?

  • stefemanstefeman Member

    @levnode said:

    @stefeman said:

    @levnode said:
    You are comparing 2 servers at different datacenter. The IP range 51.15.x.x is in AMS which is currently at maximum bandwidth. They are planning to upgrade the bandwidth in AMS. The IP range 163.172 is definitely in DC2. I have about 50 servers with them, all in DC2 and DC3 and their networks are quite good.

    I think you are right for chargeback since you are eligible for it. But why don't you test the connection before buying?

    I did, look at the fucking domain would you? If it says ams1 and gives me over 70Mbps, I expect my server to be somewhat same too.

    It makes no sense for them to put ping-ams1.online.net to france DC2 location. Most likely its geoip or localized. On top of that I have normal speeds to another server in same hallway as mine.

    My mistake, sorry. They are allocating the range 163.172.x.x to AMS also. So I think there's issue with your routing from your PC to the IP range 51.15.x.x. Have you tried traceroute?

    No, but I did plenty of MTR as posted above :P

  • yomeroyomero Member

    @lusirhe said:
    Online drama part 2.

    Got a server which would turn off daily in the last 3 days, so I asked a hardware check.
    They locked my server (without letting me save my data), provided a "new" server.

    Speeds great, hdd nice, just that the CPU is haved.

    root@whitesmokes:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'model name' | uniq 
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E3-1230 V2 @ 3.30GHz 

root@whitesmokes:~# grep -c processor /proc/cpuinfo
4

root@whitesmokes:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep processor 
processor : 0 
processor : 1 
processor : 2 
processor : 3 

root@whitesmokes:~# cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'core id' 
core id : 0 
core id : 1 
core id : 2 
core id : 3

    Shoudn't this have 8 logical cores (2 logical cores per physical)?

    HT disabled on the BIOS maybe?

  • ZealZeal Member

    Wait, I'm confused, you already charged back and got your money back?

  • locallocal Member

    In August 1st, I cancelled a 16.99 special server, and in the end I paid him 16.99 euros and asked him to delete the server. But he doesn't seem to have a refund, and I don't mind.

  • GamerTech24GamerTech24 Member

    no from what I understand he opened up a paypal dispute as he paid via PayPal, so online.net will be given an opportunity to deal with it, and if they don't PayPal themselves will step in and deal with it

    I could be wrong here, but that's what I understand

  • LeviLevi Member
    edited August 2017

    Wtf, you chargebacked online.net when not even requesting a refund for bad network? Euking chargeback scum. That's not how you deal problems with reputable provider. And from chat you provided, online.net it-self was not the problem, it was routing to your home. I wish other provider which will accept you as a customer best of luck. Personally I would submit such client to fraudrecord with all their PayPal data.
    /rant

    On a serious note: such customers are disaster for providers.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider

    Again.. what am I missing? the IP with the crap speeds is a DSL line in Finland and you would expect crap speeds.

    The IP with good speeds 163.172.208.7 is their own in FR so you would expect good speeds.

    They are not the same location?

  • stefemanstefeman Member
    edited August 2017

    I havent escalated it yet obviously. So no money has been lost by the provider. So far its only a contact form via paypal.

    They already threathen me with bailif, so I guess I'll have close the case without escalating it.

    The IP is 100/10Mbps fiber and not a DSL line. The IP gets 70/10 Mbps from another 2016 SC server in same hallway. Thats what ur missing.

  • xrzxrz Member
    edited August 2017

    Dont worry bro online.net AKA offline.net is a big sh*t company, you should leave sooner ;)

    Its NOT only slow on online.net also on scaleway loool

    https://community.online.net/t/wtf-is-going-on/5177
    https://community.online.net/t/solved-slow-download-at-amesterdam/5166/2
    https://community.online.net/t/transfer-speed-out-from-paris-location-sucks-bad/4541/2
    https://community.online.net/t/very-slow-internet-connection/4251

    aaand a lot more

    I had this problems for months! ALWAYS I DID PAYPAL DISPUTE AND ESCALATE IT, i dont fokin care what provider thinks, I WANT FOR WHAT I PAID AND THEY DONT DELIVER IT (speed crap) ;)

  • CConnerCConner Member, Host Rep
    edited August 2017

    As said above, why don't you request a refund through Online.net like a grownup. Chargebacks through PayPal are fucking annoying for the provider.

  • stefemanstefeman Member
    edited August 2017

    I had to apply some pressure. They offered me alternate server so all is good now. Dropped the chargeback and marked it as solved. Got another SC 2016 and its working just fine.

    I pity for the next one who gets my old server.

  • pbgbenpbgben Member, Host Rep

    I too have had to deal with their bullshittery. They never refund, ever.

    It took me weeks to get them to sort out my order and that was with me continuously sending replies with whatever they asked for and also follow-up every six hours. I'll add that I also had business support too, its no better. Ovh may be slow to respond, but they hire tech staff (online use cheap call center imo)

  • ehabehab Member

    @stefeman i didn't read all but can you please in short write "the tests from which points and what results indicate the server is bad" with much thanks

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited August 2017

    stefeman said: The IP is 100/10Mbps fiber and not a DSL line.

    It traces to a home connection in Finland, what on earth is the point in using that for a comparison against online.net's DC in France?

    they don't guarantee anywhere that they will max out your fttc in Finland at home and you did one test against that in rescue then another against online.net's DC in France and made out like it was the same?

    Not having a go at you but this just seems like your trying to support your narrative rather than provide real details.

    If you had shown the rescue mode connection against online.net's France DC link that would be a different story I expect so they are within their rights to say it is in fact working I guess.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • iTK98iTK98 Member

    I have 5 servers with Online.net, while I did had some issues with their support, I always manage to get it solved with them.

    I never encounter any network issues with them, are you sure everything was correct on your end?

Sign In or Register to comment.