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.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Sure, you do what’s best for you. I think in this case it might have been even better for them.
I find such responses very disgusting.
I'm paying $60 per year. I realize it's still a promotional price, but far more than what you're trying to show.
I myself have a non-commercial project for a very little community of players. It's fully depended on donations, so I try to find the best offers from what's available.
There are offers with very similar prices during BF promos, from different providers. I never noticed that these providers would relate the ticket answer time with the service price.
If you broke something with a "maintenance", after 2 years of working, then it would be fair to fix it no matter how much the client is paying for it.
Now, I'm supposed to waste my time searching for a different provider with a regular price and then migrate everything to a new server, just because you can't check few settings in your network config for over 1 month. At the end I'm the victim one, not you.
I still appreciate the honest answer. This will resolve your cheap VPS problems fully, as people will quote and link this thread in every promos thread you post here in the future.
This doesn't imply the others are happy. Maybe they've just given up because of no response.
Well, he said it all here:
Exactly. As someone who had complained here "again and again and again"--not sure if I was counted towards those "<10 people" because I've stopped doing so for a long time, and a lot of names come to mind that fit that criterion--I'd chime in and say that I stopped complaining here not because I became happy, instead, just as
I am not happy with hosthatch. Even those summer hosts that deadpooled over the years made me happier--at least it was a good ride while it lasted. I just hate that "<10 people" attitude. It's a pattern--every time when something screwed up, like data loss (happens pretty often lately), it "only" affected "a very small %", although I have personally experienced twice of data losses. Or when it comes to IPv6, surely "less than 3% of our active VMs in Sydney have IPv6 assigned, and even a smaller number of users who actively use it" (source) so it's "something that affects <1% " (as said in this thread) and those frigging annoying users must be expendable.
Maybe @hosthatch should just remove IPv6 support to keep things simple until time allows for it to be fixed. It will avoid this endless nagging from someone who pays $7/yr. Solution for now:
cat - > /etc/sysctl.d/ipv6-disable.conf <<EOF
net.ipv6.conf.all.disable_ipv6 = 1
net.ipv6.conf.default.disable_ipv6 = 1
EOF
sysctl --system
dnf update etc will work fine after this. I pay $200+ per year here and don’t give a shit. Uptime has been great.
The reason these are two different issues is that this one is a catastrophic failure, which we do care far more about. There is a certain risk involved with using parity RAIDs and hardware RAID controllers and it came to haunt us. We fixed it by creating nodes with multiple smaller RAID arrays, multiple RAID cards, using smaller drives, and having multiple hot-swaps for each node.
In the near future, we’re considering moving completely to RAID-10 for storage VMs too, since it is just too much of a headache to use anything else.
Now I am sure you can find another provider using RAID50/60, and tell me “look they are doing it fine”. We were also for more than 5 years with zero failure, at a much smaller scale. It is just a matter of probability.
As for IPv6, I’m sorry to tell you that not enough people care about it and we will most likely stop offering it for promotional services and offer refunds to people who need IPv6, since we advertised something that we were unable to deliver and we should provide a refund.
Nice. Please understand that no one is forcing this relationship on you. If you continue to stay in it, then there is the obvious argument to be made that you feel you are getting enough value for your money to stay, even with the caveats.
For the first time ever I created a "complaining" topic (or it's rather just a question). Am I also put to the group of the same <10 people complaining here again and again and again ?
Removing the IPv6 for existing services is a bad idea, as it's usually one of the factors when choosing the provider. If something got broken during the "maintenance" (which most likely wasn't that necessary as from what I understood they were moving old servers to a new control panel), then it should be fixed or at least users should be informed when it's expected to be fixed. Based on this information some customers should be allowed to apply for a refund for remaining months.
Realistically, a couple of weeks, and we will phase out IPv6 at a decided future date for promo services in most locations, so I would really recommend taking a refund if IPv6 is a 100% requirement for you.
Not picking on HostHatch specifically, but this seems to be a common problem on "LowEnd". Providers advertise features that they are unable to deliver or maintain. It begs the question: Don't they test their products thoroughly before they offer them for sale? (Don't bother to answer that.)
"We should provide a refund" is not the answer, because the customers have invested lots of time, money, and effort adding value to the servers they rent. When a provider says, "So sorry, I can't make the promised feature happen, so I'll refund your money", it sparks a large chain of losses and imposes a large future burden on the customer. It isn't the same as returning a defective keyboard and replacing it with another one.
What I would like to see, in my LowEnd dreams:
-> Advertise what you can reliably deliver.
-> Do not advertise what you cannot deliver.
and
-> Do not support an ecosystem that keeps rewarding providers who advertise what they cannot deliver.
Now why can't I follow my own good advice?
Good for those in Sydney, they experienced this "stability upgrade" a year ago or so already. Today, there's still negative reviews about it so I doubt this will improve reputation quickly.
A couple posts above the provider tries to not compare himself to another purple provider who is doing so.
Not sure I understand you. Today there are negative reviews about IPv6 in Sydney, something we do not even provide?
Not the connectivity but the lack of IPv6 support.
Can't win all battles unfortunately. I think the most logical conclusion to not being able to provide something reliably is to not provide it at all. There will still be people against it, and some random list that shows how bad we are for not supporting IPv6, but at least it doesn't lead to questions like this one from customers who put their trust in us:
@hosthatch, just in case ...
i dont know if it's a feature or a bug but the most of lg from https://hosthatch.com/features#datacenters are not operational
Yes, definitely it can save all parties from a lot of trouble. My main point was the removal from existing services. In Sydney this wasn't a smooth process with this "we leave IPv6 active and either it's working or not but we don't fix it" and then it was removed after a long time. It appears like this now just on all other locations, hence my comment that Sydney was like the blueprint.
@yoursunny
I think the core issue is the lack of information. I know it also takes time to respond, but customers should be provided with information about the possible ETA, or any other predictable time. As someone who only opened a ticket regarding IPv6, how am I supposed to know that the tickets system is working, or that there are actually people checking them? It just made me worried that one day if something failed due to hardware issue, I'd need to wait for a few weeks for someone to actually check it, just because I ordered a server from "BF Promo" which was even advertised here, on this forum.
Another thing is, even if more companies / providers are doing it, I would rather not want to know that I'm de-prioritized as a customer, just because I used the "promo" offer. Eventually, it would be better to have some clear disclaimer regarding it, on the order placing page (or in these topics created here). Otherwise, these things should be an internal company secret and never revealed public. Posting such information from the official account is harmful for the company's name (even when most of people are able to understand it and will still support the provider because of their positive experience).
Back to the IPv6 subject. For two years, it was solid stable for me. There were no issues. In July there was a maintenance that changed something, but the IPv6 address remained the same. It's a bit hard for me to understand that you can't provide something reliably when it was reliable for such a long time, until the "maintenance" was finished. I think there was some unfortunate mistake on provider's end that causes these problems at locations where it always worked fine. Maybe instead of complicating things even more with refunds, it would be easier to actually focus on these issues, at least for the existing customers.
As pretty well described by @emg in https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/3471325/#Comment_3471325
I will also need to spend a few days (or sleepless nights) to migrate things to a new provider. This month I won't even have time for it. I will need to pay a more-regular price to a new provider, because we have quite a bit time remaining until the next BF offers from netcup and others appear. It would be much more fair to fix the issues in some acceptable period of time than force customers to waste their time for unnecessary things.
Why do other hosts with cheap services have no trouble with IPv6? It was working perfectly with most of your locations until the migration to the new panel. I guess I don't quite understand how IPv6 is an issue but IPv4 is fine, unless your upstreams have bad quality networks or the networking hardware is old and doesn't support IPv6 well. I signed up with a different provider with kinda somewhat similar prices and they have no trouble with IPv6...
If you do want to remove IPv6, can you please give at least two months notice, ideally longer? I've got 16 VPSes with HostHatch (probably $350-400/year) and the majority of them rely on IPv6 connectivity, and migrating that many VPSes to another host is not trivial.
I still haven't heard anything about hardware replacement in Los Angeles after the data loss incident a few months ago... Do you still have plans to do that?
I think it's just odd that the new panel was supposed to be superior at least in terms of networking yet can't do IPv6 and can't count storage in GiB.
NewPanel™
Honestly i more like old panel which we can add / assign single ipv6 from subnet automatically within panel vs add manually in new panel
Sometimes under 5 min but sometimes weaks.
Don't be sorry, I don't care. But maybe you should stop offering IPv6 altogether. I can imagine the same "take it or leave it" attitude toward regular price customers when a very small % of them cry for broken IPv6. It still won't be worth it to fix, because that % is too small, so why not just let the customers take refund and leave.
If you stay with them longer enough, which I suggest you don't, you'll know that they simply don't care. They are always stonewalling and won't change. Just take it or leave it.
HostHatch better hope they don't have anymore data loss events around the time they deprecate IPv6 or the refunds in that month will be bloody.
"it only affects less than 3% of customers" so a non issue there.
Submitted a ticket... jumped in here.. now I wonder whether it's going to be a long one since I've been waiting longer than 5 minutes.
I'm interested to understand where the pain points are, and what sorts of challenges you've run into being able to provide v6 services or support by default. Is it a matter is staff familiarity with the tech, the lack of parity in tooling, address assignment strategy, PTR updates, routing, monitoring tools, etc? Thanks for any insight in advance.
It happened that I had to submit a ticket today because it was ~12 hours past the scheduled NVMe5.LAX maintenance window yet the server had not be back online. Now it's another 12 hours past and still radio silence, no public notice or any reply. Guess my "urgent" ticket was possibly deliberately ignored, again, because of the country I'm from. And so much for your "near 100% uptime it gets". Downtime has been 28 hours for your "<15 minutes total expected downtime".
I am afraid you left out incompetence and indifference, but the real pain points are possibly the customers, especially those "<10", "1%" or "3%" PITA.
Also approaching two days of radio silence on my ticket as well. It was not marked as urgent, since it isn't.