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


BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Server.net
CPLicense.net
VPS Server
Buy VPN
Vultr
VMs for AI
HostDare
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
VDS.net
InterServer VPS
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Best VPN
High-Performance Bare Metal Server Solutions
Karvl.com
Server Mania Cloud Hosting
DataWagon Hosting
AlphaVPS Hosting
Evoxt.com
Clouvider
VPS Hosting with NVMe
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
Rabisu - Hosting Solutions
CloudLinux
MeduzaVPN
Servury - Anonymous & Privacy-focused VPS Hosting
Animated Silicon Kiwi cloud ad featuring VPS from $4.90/month, 100 GB S3 storage from $1.49/month, Kiwi Apps from $12/month and cloud backup from $3/month

Categories

In this Discussion

Home › General
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.

HostDZire IPv6 Allocation Violation: Service Terminated After Configuration Error

124»

Comments

  • zedzed Veteran
    edited October 11

    it's possible the op assumed he had /64 but was only actually assigned a single ipv6 as that's how the leaseweb box i had via @HostDZire in the paypal past was configured.

    i mean at the end of the day still all irrelevant, but i've not seen anything that made me thing he was being (overtly) malicious.

    Thanked by 1OpaqueRegistrant
  • forestforest Member

    @zed said: i mean at the end of the day still all irrelevant, but i've not seen anything that made me thing he was being (overtly) malicious.

    Even if he knew they were unauthorized, if he wasn't using them, it seems to me more like exploration than malice. Unless he kept them for a long time without alerting the host or used them for anything.

    Thanked by 1bbmmsvr4u
  • mltobingmltobing Member

    So the OP found a bug where he could assign himself unauthorized IPv6 addresses. Instead of fixing it, they banned the OP.

    Thanked by 2CoolGeek OpaqueRegistrant
  • TimboJonesTimboJones Member

    @forest said:

    @zed said: i mean at the end of the day still all irrelevant, but i've not seen anything that made me thing he was being (overtly) malicious.

    Even if he knew they were unauthorized, if he wasn't using them, it seems to me more like exploration than malice. Unless he kept them for a long time without alerting the host or used them for anything.

    Cause IP conflict with another customer that was assigned that range?

  • CheepCluckCheepCluck Member

    @HostDZire said:
    Sure, i am not saying anything here, feel free to post whole ticket screenshots..

    Id be interested in seeing the whole ticket screenshots.
    @Flanker, can you please share?? 🥺

    Thanked by 2forest monsoon73
  • forestforest Member

    @TimboJones said:

    @forest said:

    @zed said: i mean at the end of the day still all irrelevant, but i've not seen anything that made me thing he was being (overtly) malicious.

    Even if he knew they were unauthorized, if he wasn't using them, it seems to me more like exploration than malice. Unless he kept them for a long time without alerting the host or used them for anything.

    Cause IP conflict with another customer that was assigned that range?

    Did he? If everyone is getting just a /128, the chances are astronomically small unless intentional.

    Thanked by 1OpaqueRegistrant
  • lovelyserverlovelyserver Member

    @HostDZire can I get that Fat32 special VM?

  • JohnFilch123JohnFilch123 Member

    @lovelyserver said:
    @HostDZire can I get that Fat32 special VM?

    Unlikely.

  • lovelyserverlovelyserver Member

    @JohnFilch123 said:

    @lovelyserver said:
    @HostDZire can I get that Fat32 special VM?

    Unlikely.

    He said no. I've sent him a message.

    Probably I should do push-ups before, to get it.

    Sad. Really sad that beautiful is let to sink.

  • JohnFilch123JohnFilch123 Member
    edited October 11

    @lovelyserver said:

    @JohnFilch123 said:

    @lovelyserver said:
    @HostDZire can I get that Fat32 special VM?

    Unlikely.

    He said no. I've sent him a message.

    Probably I should do push-ups before, to get it.

    Sad. Really sad that beautiful is let to sink.

    It is a nice server but won't survive the same price in 2027 but well, this is life. Please do push-ups, they are good for you.

    Thanked by 1lovelyserver
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker
    edited October 11

    @Flanker said:
    ...

    8. Questions for the LET Community

    I would be interested in hearing other members' perspectives:

    1. Is permanent service termination a common response to a first-time unauthorized IPv6 configuration, even when the customer acknowledges the issue and offers to disable IPv6?

    Irrelevant.

    1. How do other VPS providers handle unauthorized IPv6 addresses at the hypervisor, virtual switch, or upstream router level?

    Irrelevant.

    1. Would you consider cancellation and a prorated refund a reasonable resolution in this situation?

    No - because a prorated refund is not "reasonable", it is very kind and generous.

    In another comment

    @Flanker said:
    Attitude: This is where I have a problem. I found the repeated assumptions of malicious intent unnecessarily subjective and unfair. Of course, I understand that you may see things differently from the provider's perspective.

    (a) do not confuse your subjective interpretation with objective reality!
    (b) assumptions of malicious intent unnecessary and, if true, are just amplifying but not the decisive factor. In other words: malicious, unintended, whatever is not really relevant. Use of an IP that is not yours is.
    (c) Why should a host risk another AUP/TOS violation to be perceived as "reasonable", "fair", or "friendly" by someone who violated the terms? Btw. that would not even solve the problem but merely shift it from one violation to multiple violations (and how many?) - at the risk/cost of the provider.

    Maybe think about your attitude!

    Thanked by 1HostDZire
  • OpaqueRegistrantOpaqueRegistrant Member

    @xvps said:
    TL;DR

    HostDZire kicked a mjj down the stairs.
    It was wong at so many levels.

    I wish such nonconstructive comments were against the rules. HostDzire's being pretty unreasonable here, as I expected from them.

  • xvpsxvps Member

    @OpaqueRegistrant said:

    @xvps said:
    TL;DR

    HostDZire kicked a mjj down the stairs.
    It was wong at so many levels.

    I wish such nonconstructive comments were against the rules. HostDzire's being pretty unreasonable here, as I expected from them.

    So you got offended by a joke. :D

  • TimboJonesTimboJones Member

    @forest said:

    @TimboJones said:

    @forest said:

    @zed said: i mean at the end of the day still all irrelevant, but i've not seen anything that made me thing he was being (overtly) malicious.

    Even if he knew they were unauthorized, if he wasn't using them, it seems to me more like exploration than malice. Unless he kept them for a long time without alerting the host or used them for anything.

    Cause IP conflict with another customer that was assigned that range?

    Did he? If everyone is getting just a /128, the chances are astronomically small unless intentional.

    Was it /128 for sure? Then no.

Sign In or Register to comment.