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.
SolidVPS
This discussion was created from comments split from: Necropost.
Thanked by 1hyperblast
Comments
SolidVPS.com – Hall of Shame
I had a VPS with SolidVPS since January. I chose them because their servers were close to my location. Recently I asked if I could get a /56 IPv6 allocation instead of the default /64, because I wanted to route it over WireGuard back to my home (I don’t have a static residential IP).
Instead of discussing it, Martin Goodman decided to immediately close my account and delete the VPS without any warning or my consent.
This is completely unacceptable. Just because I asked for proper IPv6 addressing (which RIPE-690 actually recommends — they suggest /56 or even /48 for end users), they wiped my account like it was nothing.
Be careful using SolidVPS. They can delete your account and data at any moment without notice. I was lucky I only used this VPS to route IPv4 traffic. I would never trust them with anything important.
Screenshots:
he said 1 /64 on promo.
Prove he's lying.
There seems to be some correspondence missing between the posted messages.
Nevertheless immediate cancellation by the provider is a dick move. That’s the nuclear option and should only be used for abuse or similar serious situations. Any normal disagreement should end when the current paid period finishes.
show screenshot of your tickets too pls
Wahh wahhh, whiny. If you don't like the way they do things, go elsewhere. They told you that they won't do it, you got pissy and threw a fit and they threw you out instead of caving. Good job Solid!
Seems like those screenshots are taken out of the context. Also, @SolidVPS
That's concerning to read, as I'm hosting some production with them on a dedi. I hope this can be cleared up.
Op is hiding his responses, probably pointing to unimportant ipv6 wall of shame from some user here, and threatening with not renewing..
ALso there is problem with this sentence.. just because they recommends does not mean it is proper or should..
@crpsz
Your post is not only inappropriate but also highly misleading. You purchased our Lithuania VPS promotional offer for $20/year, which clearly includes a /64 IPv6 allocation. You later requested a /56 or /48, and we informed you—politely and transparently—that the deal includes /64 only. Despite this, we still offered an additional /64 as an exceptional courtesy, beyond what is provided to other clients.
Your response was unprofessional. You escalated the situation, threatened cancellation and "Welcome to LET hall of shame", and proceeded to make baseless accusations. We do not retain clients who attempt to pressure us for resources outside the scope of the service and then resort to hostility when their demands are not met.
As a result, your account was terminated, and you were refunded in full—including the five months of service you had already used at no charge. Given these facts, it is unclear what grounds you believe you have to complain.
We maintain a strict standard of conduct and will not tolerate abusive behavior toward our staff or attempts to exploit our services.
A complete set of fabricated claims. I’m glad my team handled the situation exactly as they should have.
@SolidVPS
Which part is supposed to be so egregious that it warrants immediate deletion and cancellation?
So the “egregious” part wasn’t the request — it was the conduct, the threats, and the attempt to pressure us into providing resources outside the scope of the promo. We don’t retain clients who behave that way. These are more than enough
A /64 IPv6 subnet contains 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 usable host addresses.
There is no way OP couldn't do whatever he wanted with this amount.
You could route all electronic devices in the the milky way with that allocation.
@SolidVPS
Are you leaving out part of the correspondence or are you stating that the provided screenshots warrant immediate deletion and cancellation?
This is exactly why we believe the client was not fully aware of what they were requesting. They were simply following RIPE’s recommendations for BGP allocations, which apply to network operators — not end‑users. While a BGP deployment typically requires a /48 as a starting point, that is not a client‑side assignment
The screenshots you’re referring to omit the full context. The facts are simple: the promo included a /64, claimer demanded allocations outside the scope of the offer, we extended a courtesy, and when threats followed, we refunded and terminated. That is the complete story. We’ve already addressed this matter and will not continue going back and forth.
They deserved it @SolidVPS
No bargain with threatening and extortion
@SolidVPS
So, to clarify, this is the statement by OP that warranted immediate deletion and cancellation:
"I hope you don't mind to be in a hall of shame in Low End Talk and other forums ;-) "
Reply to SolidVPS:
What's wrong with telling the truth?
I was completely polite in the ticket. I simply asked for a /48 (or at least /56) because I wanted to route IPv6 over WireGuard to my home.
You replied that you only offer /64 and could give me one extra /64 as a “courtesy”.
Martin Goodman then immediately closed my account and deleted the VPS before I could even reply inside the ticket.
I only sent the RIPE-690 link after the account was already closed, via direct email. That was my first and only mention of the document. There was zero escalation or hostility from my side before you cancelled everything.
You can keep calling it “unprofessional” and saying LET has “no weight”, but the facts are simple: I asked for a normal IPv6 prefix that many providers give without any drama, and you instantly wiped a 5-month-old paying customer with zero warning.
RIPE-690 explicitly states why ISPs should not give end-users only a /64:
That’s exactly why people should be careful with SolidVPS.
Just leaving a record for future me
Proof the account was closed so I could not share whole conversation:
Just out of curiosity, is /64 not suitable for this?
@crpsz threating provider with hall of shame for not providing /56 allocation was not nice of you. Not like I agree with immediate service termination either - both parties here made an unnecessary escalation.
This bitch is stealing our chickens
Good one; you still get the tickets via mail.
fair and professional enough.
@crpsz
RIPE-690 explicitly states why ISPs should not give end-users only a /64:
This is your doom. You are dealing with Hosting Provider, not an ISP.
/64 is more than enough, you could have just accept second one given out of generosity and use that one full for wireguard tunnel, leaving other one for what ever you want.
Closing account after "Hall of Shame" as pressure method? I can live with that, I would prefer "we won't allow you to extend or transfer service anymore", but closing (with refund) will also work.
Doing it immediately? Deleting all the client data? Without any notice or cooldown?
Fuck no. That wasn't that bad, be serious @SolidVPS you guys just had a bad day...
Until there is something more with "I kill you", "Fuck your mother" or "I will CPU YABS 24/7 for rest of the paid time" (cough specific LET user).
The listing condition of IPv6 less than /64 Hall of Incompetence is providing less than /64 prefix.
Having exactly one /64 would not result in listing on this hall.
Why not ask your residential ISP for the allocation?
IPv6-PD requires a whole /64 routed into the residential router.
If the VPS has only one /64, moving it to the residential router would result in the VPS itself to lose its IPv6 address, and require unusual setup.
However, even if OP receives a large allocation, it would not work for this use case.
Last time we checked, @SolidVPS offers an on-link prefix.
IPv6-PD requires a routed prefix and does not work with an on-link prefix.
OP should choose a provider from Routed IPv6 Hall of Fame instead.
@yoursunny but will it work if the op got second /64 and use that one?
That's still not routed.
Let me make this absolutely clear so we can close this once and for all.
If you are on a $20/year promo, and you come asking for resources beyond what the offer includes, that’s already outside the scope of the deal. Instead of simply saying “no, that’s not included” — which we had every right to do — we still tried to help and offered an additional /64 as a courtesy.
What followed was not a discussion. It was rudeness, threats, and escalation.
You said you wouldn’t renew. You said you’d go to another provider. Then you escalated further and threatened to “post everywhere.” At that point, the relationship was over. We refunded you and moved on. We’d rather give that $20/year slot to someone who actually deserves it.
This is exactly why we do not allow “low‑end” promos to attract “low‑end” behavior. We eliminate it quickly.
For the record, the client doesn’t even understand what he’s talking about. We have plenty of customers running WireGuard on IPv6‑only VPS setups with /112, not even /64, long before we expanded allocations. All our IPv6 is routed — he didn’t even try. He just read something on RIPE meant for BGP allocations, not end‑user VPS assignments, and tried to act like a smart guy in the wrong context.
We reserve the right to terminate service at any time, especially when a client brings attitude, threats, and nonsense. This is clearly stated in our Terms of Service.
We’ve already refunded him. We’re done.
This is our final statement on the matter. We don’t need to defend our operations — we know exactly what we do right and wrong. In this case, the issue is entirely on that individual, and the outcome is exactly what they earned.
hey guys is all of tampa offline