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
Well, this backfired quickly.
The justification you provided was declined. It was "for websites". It should have been "for websites with SSL's". I asked you if it was for SSL's and never got a reply.
Your justification was: "For sites"
Well, Dacentec required it so I had to pass it on.
Acceptable justification could have been provided just saying it was for SSL's
You said the only way is for ssl's client told me its for whm/cpanel dedicated ip's for separate domains/website you said not acceptable justification
I said that you don't need a seperate IP address unless it's for SSL certificates. If you'd said why he needed seperate IP's I'd have processed the request.
Perhaps.
The provider had policy, which i passed on.
So.....you lost $85 in a dispute and as a result went out of business??
Nope....this dispute happened after PremiumVM was sold.
Why is everyone beating on Dominicl? He seems to be in the right here.
Wondering the same.
InviteVPS Client bought dedi from InviteVPS > InviteVPS bought off Dominic > InviteVPS Client chargebacks InviteVPS > InviteVPS Chargebacks Dominic because client charged back? Not sure how thats legitimate business practice.
I also don't see why @domincl you just refunded actionx, if you counter claimed you would have easily won. Pretty poor business practice from @actionx
Sorry to be a jackass, but he fucked it up
EDIT: Oh, he wanted to get rid of his left over clients and decided to refund
This is correct, yes. He disputed against me because his client disputed against him. The whole dispute was against the IP's, which acceptable justification was not provided for.
I may have won, yes. I've only had 1 previous dispute as far as I can remember which I lost.
+1.
The case will be closed when refund processes in a week.
I can vouch for this. Dacentec is tough on their IPs. I don't blame them, it's completely within their right. If you don't have a very good reason, you're not getting additional IPs from Dacentec. If @dominicl provided them without a very good reason, he wouldn't be able to request additional ones unless he lied about it, and lying to your IP provider isn't exactly doing good business.
So allow me to be the unpopular voice here and say... @dominicl clearly did the right thing.
+1.
Dont promote servers with additional IP's if you not gona give it
Exactly, i'm not going to lie for the sake of a client.
Is that all you got?
I believe every provider promotes server with additional IP as long as you can justify it. Don't have justification? IPV6 is free
I promoted the server with additional IP's, but acceptable justification has to be provided first!!
They will give it, with proper justification. Just like every other provider out there. In fact, it's common practice to sell you IPs and not even provide all of them until a certain allotment is used. Incero does this. LiquidWeb does this. It's not at all uncommon, doesn't matter who likes it or doesn't like it. The fact of the matter is that we're approaching an IPv4 shortage and IP owners need to keep their ducks in a row.
I can also sympathize with how frustrating this is. It took me a while to learn how to play ball.
Exactly @jarland
If the client had provided acceptable justification not just "for separate sites" or similar, then it would have been fine.
SSL certificates would have been an acceptable form of justification. For separate websites unfortunately isn't.
No because your not shipping a physical product? Your giving them access to a service for a period of time not indefinitely.
Don't order IPs and not supply a justification or else you're not going to get it.
I require justification for every single IP, even if my server provider is much less strict. Why? Because I want to make sure that no IPs are wasted or used inefficiently; they are short and I don't want to contribute to that shortage.
And I am also going to be in the minority here that I think @dominicl is in the right.
@shovenose for example, if someone used justification "OVZ VPSes" and wanted a /24 would you allow it?
@curtisg nope
I would usually not give out anything over a /27 anyway. Unless they get a really big server the maybe a /26
Nope!. If the server was an L5420 or similar, then a /24 would not be justifiable.
Why not? Get some sort of rules like if new client, 40-50% instant usage within a week or for old client with reputation or legitimate provider , we won't think twice.
Possibly, if the cilent was to be getting more than 1 server.
So, lets say a company walks up, wants a e3-1230v2 with 32gb ram, but wants a /24 with justification for OVZ vps, would you allow it?
You realize he doesn't own a company anymore right?
Not this week anyway :P