Problems with connections
Daniel Moore
Richard.
Check your phone book entry for Demon and make sure it has the following
Primary DNS 158.152.1.43
Secondary DNS 158.152.1.58
Both WINS should say 0.0.0.0
Sever assigned IP Address.
If these are OK and you only experienced probs this evening then I would be
inclined to point the finger at Demon.
Dan.
Richard J Warburton <ric...@devidia.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<34c3db46...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>
> Okay, I have dialled up about ten times tonight and each time
> everything goes fine, NT 4.0 says connected, authenticated, whatever,
> but then that's it, I can't ping anything. But on other occasions
> things are fine.
>
> Has there been something strange going on at Demon tonight? Or is this
> a problem with NT?
>
> Richard.
>
Dave Mills
There sure was. We were using Demon and another ISP connection at
about 18:30 last night and there were all sorts of problems on both
systems. Looked like large areas of the net were unreachable. Could
ping www.whitehouse.gov but not www.microsoft.com. AltaVista was
reachable but not Lycos etc.
ric...@devidia.demon.co.uk (Richard J Warburton) wrote:
>
>Okay, I have dialled up about ten times tonight and each time
>everything goes fine, NT 4.0 says connected, authenticated, whatever,
>but then that's it, I can't ping anything. But on other occasions
>things are fine.
>
>Has there been something strange going on at Demon tonight? Or is this
>a problem with NT?
>
>Richard.
--
Dave Mills MCSE,MCT Home: Dave...@ravesw.demon.co.uk
Reading, Berks Work: dmi...@shx.co.uk
England
Karl Prust
And I bet they wont adit it!!!!
Karl Prust
Richard J Warburton wrote in message <34c6ecc...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>On Mon, 19 Jan 1998 23:02:51 GMT, ric...@devidia.demon.co.uk (Richard
>J Warburton) wrote:
>>
>>Has there been something strange going on at Demon tonight? Or is this
>>a problem with NT?
>>
>>Richard.
>
>Well I managed to connect fine tonight, so yesterday there must have
>been something strange going on with routing at demon.
>
>Richard.
Bryan Colyer
In article <886724561.18731.0...@news.demon.co.uk>, Karl
Prust <kpr...@tsgc.co.uk> writes
I sent an email to Cliff Stanford because I was so fed up. But I got the
standard excuse letter from Customer Services, saying that routine
maintenance is essential! Did you see M. Muir's email dated 30 Jan, in
which he *actually admitted* there have been problems (routing or packet
loss, which to me means I can't get email/news/ log on etc.)?
Service has been much better during the past few days. I hope this will
continue, or I shall be looking elsewhere.
Dan Sumption
On Fri, 6 Feb 1998 18:48:36 +0000, Bryan Colyer
<br...@bmcolyer.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I sent an email to Cliff Stanford because I was so fed up. But I got the
>standard excuse letter from Customer Services, saying that routine
>maintenance is essential! Did you see M. Muir's email dated 30 Jan, in
>which he *actually admitted* there have been problems (routing or packet
>loss, which to me means I can't get email/news/ log on etc.)?
>
>Service has been much better during the past few days. I hope this will
>continue, or I shall be looking elsewhere.
There seems to have been a lot of problems lately. I have been with
Demon around 3 years, and after an initial 6 months or so of constant
engaged lines & other problems at Demon's end, they have provided a
couple of years of consistently good service. However, of late the
number of routing problems etc. has grown again to ridiculous
proportions.
I have a recurring problem - happens every 2 or 3 days for a period of
at least an hour - when I dial in, I get connected OK and usually get
between 30 seconds and 3 minutes of normal connectivity. Then suddenly
everything goes - I can't view any websites, collect mail, or even
ping gate. The first couple of times this happened I thought I must
have messed something up, but I have since checked all my settings
thoroughly, and this combined with the fact that it happens so
randomly but with such similar symptoms, suggests to me that it is
down to Demon buggering about again. Demon support always profess
ignorance, and imply that it's because of my insistence on using an
unsupported platform, i.e. NT (yeah, like I really have time to deal
with Windows 95, which in my experience crashes on average about 12
times a day).
BTW, I have heard rumours from informed sources that Demon are in big
trouble - they now have such huge hardware requirements to keep up
with current demands, but no money to finance these requirements - so
the future doesn't look too rosy!
Dan Sumption
http://www.hardnet.co.uk/dan/
Malcolm Muir
Dan Sumption (d...@gulch.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> BTW, I have heard rumours from informed sources that Demon are in big
> trouble - they now have such huge hardware requirements to keep up
> with current demands, but no money to finance these requirements - so
> the future doesn't look too rosy!
I am afraid your informed sources are badly informed. There are no
financial problems at Demon.
--
Malcolm S. Muir Demon Internet Ltd.
Sunderland 322 Regents Park Road
England London N3 2QQ
Dan Sumption
On 7 Feb 98 17:42:51 GMT, mal...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net (Malcolm
Muir) wrote:
>I am afraid your informed sources are badly informed. There are no
>financial problems at Demon.
Is it untrue then that your major shareholder is trying, but unable,
to sell up? Is it also untrue that you recently encountered a "crash"
in more of a literal sense than usual - i.e. caused by a rack of
machines too heavy for the Victorian floor they were standing on
"crashing" to the floor below?
Much as I appreciate the problems of running an operation the size of
Demon, service has been abysmal over the last 2 months or so, worse
even than it was in 1994/5, and this certainly does little to inspire
confidence. This morning is a case in point - transfer rates of around
1000bytes/sec (over a 33.6 modem), pings to gate timing out or taking
around 750ms to reply. The lights on my modem are getting used to
having life easy!
Dan Sumption
http://www.hardnet.co.uk/dan/
Malcolm Muir
Dan Sumption (d...@gulch.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> On 7 Feb 98 17:42:51 GMT, mal...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net (Malcolm
> Muir) wrote:
> >I am afraid your informed sources are badly informed. There are no
> >financial problems at Demon.
>
> Is it untrue then that your major shareholder is trying, but unable,
> to sell up?
The majority shareholder is Cliff Stanford. Last time I spoke to
him he was not looking to 'sell up'.
> Is it also untrue that you recently encountered a "crash"
> in more of a literal sense than usual - i.e. caused by a rack of
> machines too heavy for the Victorian floor they were standing on
> "crashing" to the floor below?
No, that is not true. We have reinforced a floor in one of our
buildings (about 6 months ago), but that was planned and
structured action to permit development of the site.
> Much as I appreciate the problems of running an operation the size of
> Demon, service has been abysmal over the last 2 months or so, worse
> even than it was in 1994/5, and this certainly does little to inspire
> confidence. This morning is a case in point - transfer rates of around
> 1000bytes/sec (over a 33.6 modem), pings to gate timing out or taking
> around 750ms to reply. The lights on my modem are getting used to
> having life easy!
I respectfully suggest you check your configuration as that is not
my experience and I do not see the huge volume of complaints (not
even in demon.service) such performance usualy triggers.
Dan Sumption
On 8 Feb 98 12:24:03 GMT, mal...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net (Malcolm
Muir) wrote:
>The majority shareholder is Cliff Stanford. Last time I spoke to
>him he was not looking to 'sell up'.
>No, that is not true. We have reinforced a floor in one of our
>buildings (about 6 months ago), but that was planned and
>structured action to permit development of the site.
The rumors that I head were just that, and I accept that there is
every possibility that they were exaggerated or distorted (although I
think it unlikely that they were totally unfounded - the person I
heard this information from is frequently on Demon premises or in
touch with staff).
>I respectfully suggest you check your configuration as that is not
>my experience and I do not see the huge volume of complaints (not
>even in demon.service) such performance usualy triggers.
I'm 99.99% certain there's nothing wrong with my configuration - it's
exactly the same as it was a few months back when I used to get decent
connections. It is also the same tonight, and I am once more getting
good response times.
However, I do admit that slow transfer rates are a very rare problem
with Demon these days - I only mentioned it because I was composing my
message at the same time as getting such abysmal performance. A far
more insidious problem of late has been the complete loss of routeing,
which seems to be increasingly common (and often comes in bursts - so
that I can be forced to repeatedly dial-up, perform operations for 30
seconds, lose routeing, hang up, dial up again..... often for hours at
a time - frustrating is an understatement, not to mention very
expensive in phone costs).
Perhaps this is a problem with my set-up - although I would be
interested to hear what part of my set up could cause this to happen
so erratically (I am usually online between 4-15 hours a day, and this
problem occurs around twice a week for a period of 20 minues to 2
hours). The fact that virtually identical problems occur whether I am
connecting from home using my NT box & Courier dual standard, at work
using a Win 95 machine and Motorola 28.8, or at my colleague's house
using a Power Mac and Sportster 14.4 strongly suggest that the problem
is with Demon, not with me.
Dan Sumption
http://www.hardnet.co.uk/dan/
John Beardmore
>BTW, I have heard rumours from informed sources that Demon are in big
>trouble - they now have such huge hardware requirements to keep up
>with current demands, but no money to finance these requirements - so
>the future doesn't look too rosy!
I wouldn't believe all you hear, but personally I think it's because
they keep spending it on silly football clubs !
J/.
--
John Beardmore
Richard Gunstone
I have to take issue with you there. Last week's financial papers printed an
article about Demon Internet, saying Cliff Stanford was looking to sell his
~49% share of the company. "A company of Demon Internet's size would have
fetched £600 million 3 years ago" it reads, but goes on to mention the
saturated market Demon Internet finds itself in, and how its current-day
value is a small fraction of the figure just mentioned.
--
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What happens if a big asteroid hits the Earth?
Judging from realistic simulations involving a
sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we
can assume it will be pretty bad.
> - Dave Barry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-------------------------------------------------------------
Contacting Richard Gunstone:
Electronic Mail to: ric...@gunstone.demon.co.uk
WWW: www.gunstone.demon.co.uk
-------------------------------------------------------------
This signature was from file [c:\internet\5.sig]
and was auto-Generated at : March 2, 1998 2:27:16 pm
-------------------------------------------------------------
Malcolm Muir wrote in message <34dc9...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net>...
>Dan Sumption (d...@gulch.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>
>> BTW, I have heard rumours from informed sources that Demon are in big
>> trouble - they now have such huge hardware requirements to keep up
>> with current demands, but no money to finance these requirements - so
>> the future doesn't look too rosy!
>
>I am afraid your informed sources are badly informed. There are no
>financial problems at Demon.
>
Roger W Turner
Richard Ashton <{R}@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote as follows
on Tue, 3 Mar 1998 at 20:10:19 ...
>
>In article <888863185.23053.1...@news.demon.co.uk>
> ric...@gunstoneNOSPAM.demon.co.uk "Richard Gunstone" writes:
>
>} then you acknowledge there are serious performance issues?
>
>Are you trying for fuckwit of the month ?
>
<snip>
>
>Keep this shit out of the newsgroups, sunshine.
>
<snip>
>
>And learn how to drive a newsreader.
I don't always agree with {R}, and I am never, ever driven to such
language myself <vbg>, but I sympathise this time.
Seriously though, it seems to me that Mr Gunstone has been going a
little beyond normal trolling. Somewhere in Demon's 165,000 there will
be those who are covertly acting on behalf of other ISPs. Maybe ...
--
Roger W Turner not their views ---> roger....@dfee.gov.uk
+44 370 523109 r...@frodsham.demon.co.uk
Richard Gunstone
>Are you trying for fuckwit of the month ?
Er, Nope. Seems the only `fuckwit` around here is `you`.
A quick survey of you're other messages leads one to believe that:
a - Your pompous
b - arrogant
c - nearly always *wrong*
d - a likely candidate for 'fuckwit of the month'!
>Keep this shit out of the newsgroups, sunshine.
Sunshine, hmmm, you're a great authority on that - most, if not all of it
seems to becoming from your arse! (or so you arrogantly think).
In answer to the sentence: KMA. See if you can decipher that.
>
>And learn how to drive a newsreader.
I can sign my messages how I desire. If it eats your bandwidth *good*.
You sir, are in *no* position to give me instructions.
I may have trouble using my newsreader, but I know exactly how to flag
authors I wish to ignore. Don't bother replying to any of my messages again,
my newsreader will ignore them. Keep your comments to yourself.
~~~~~~
It seems comments like *yours* are the ones that denigrate decent newsgroups
such as this. All your *abusive* viewpoint would have needed was a short
*well-mannered* reply asking that I shorten my signature. Instead you
*swear*, and [try to] order me to do it.
I refer you to http://jade.wabash.edu/wabnet/info/netiquet.htm , section 4.
Read it.
It'll do you a lot of good.
`{R}`
Richard Gunstone
>I don't always agree with {R}, and I am never, ever driven to such
>language myself <vbg>, but I sympathise this time.
But you don't agree ! ;)
>Seriously though, it seems to me that Mr Gunstone has been going a
>little beyond normal trolling.
They're valid points. (I admit, worded a bit too offensively. My sincere
apologies to Mr Muir).
>Somewhere in Demon's 165,000 there will
>be those who are covertly acting on behalf of other ISPs. Maybe ...
Quite the contrary! I happen to think Demon is one of the best ISPs going.
It's not many ISPs that keep to a flat rate for usage.
Discussion of connectivity is however, necessary.
Even moreso in a newsgroup dedicated to it.
--
-Richard- ric...@NOSPAMgunstone.demon.co.uk
Ian Linwood
>In article <888863185.23053.1...@news.demon.co.uk>
> ric...@gunstoneNOSPAM.demon.co.uk "Richard Gunstone" writes:
>
>} then you acknowledge there are serious performance issues?
>
>Are you trying for fuckwit of the month ?
>
>} --
>} --
>} ----
>} ----
>} ---
>} This i
>} signat
>} addres
>} ---------
>} ----
>} ---------
>} Contactin
>} Electroni
>} WWW: ww
>} ---------
>} This sign
>} and was a
>} ---------
>}
>
>
>Keep this shit out of the newsgroups, sunshine.
>
>
>} Malcolm Muir wrote in message <34dda...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net>...
>} >Dan Sumption (d...@gulch.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>} >> On 7 Feb 98 17:42:51 GMT, mal...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net (Malcolm
>
>And learn how to drive a newsreader.
>
>{R}
Oh Richard, we couldn't deprive you of that honor, even if we tried.
Ian Linwood
http://www.dinwoodi.demon.co.uk
e-mail: i...@dinwoodi.demon.co.uk
Richard Gunstone
To be honest I didn't bother reading you're message much.
Your homepage URL, Dick, did however provide humour.
Richard Ashtons homepage is titled "Corixia's Cornucopia"
Need I say more?
As for the cat biographies. Well.
Not that I have nothing against the creatures, but posting 'On March 1st
Smokey gave birth to three very pretty kittens.' and other airy-fairy
bleatings does even more to convince me that you're the newsgroup equivalent
of "The Village Idiot".
You're website amused me so much, I'd thought I'd quote it for all to see:
"<pic of a cat >The cats run the house, they are females after all. Smokey,
apart from the disgraceful "caterwauling" on New Years Day, when she
apparantly successfully, wished to get pregnant, is the lady of the house.
Her slightly haughty and disdainful attitude is more than offset by her
willingness to roll on her back to get her tummy rubbed. "
You're paying *waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy* too much attention to your
pets!
Make some friends. Go to the pub. Socialise.
"He has been known to be helpful.." (Corixia in reference to himself)
Tips:
1. always smoke a pipe with a serious look on your face.
2. Don't shove pictures on your site of oneself smoking a pipe with a big
cheesy grin, as if it's a new toy. You'll look a fool.
If you need shock therapy for this condition, look at Mr Ashton's page:
http://www.ftech.net/~horizon/richard/
--
-Richard- ric...@NOSPAMgunstone.demon.co.uk
Dan Sumption
On Wed, 04 Mar 98 18:49:03 GMT, {R}@nospam.demon.co.uk (Richard
Ashton), whose real email address, should spammers be interested, is
wrote:
>All reputable FAQ's, FYI's and RFC's recommend 4 lines or fewer.
Do the FAQs make any mention of jumped-up net dictators compounding
the problem by posting tens of lines of pointless drivel in response
to the minor misdemeanour of going over your allotted 4 lines?
And if they only "recommend" it, rather than insisting, decreeing or
compelling, then surely it's not exactly a hanging offence?
>Worked though didn't it.
Bullshit. Had you made a polite comment, no doubt it would have been
just as effective and subscribers to this newsgroup wouldn't have had
an extra sackload of mail as you and the other Richard slang it out
with each other. And this message would also have been uneccesary
(well, it still is uneccesary as no doubt it'll leave no impression on
one so dim-witted, but I'm still going to post it because I get a kick
out of insulting pricks like you).
>} d - a likely candidate for 'fuckwit of the month'!
>
>Hardly, http://www.ftech.net/~horizon/richard/fuckwit.hts
From which I quote:
:A fuckwit is someone who lacks the ability to receive Clue.
:Clue doesn't actually have anything to do with technical
:knowledge, but is more a matter of social competence.
Well, from what I've seen, Richard G did get the point and act on it,
despite the scatalogical tone of your original post. If I were asked
to describe Richard A on the basis of his 2 posts, I couldn't have put
it better than the above sentence if I tried.
BTW Richard (A), the link to "Corixias Cornucopia" on the (sadly
empty) insults page of your website is broken. This is Clue. I'll be
back tomorrow to see if you received it.
Just for your benefit, I'll eschew my usual 2-line sig for something
more anti-social (also means that you can flame me on the phone at
your own cost).
And, as a self-confessed flouter of netiquette, I'll be quite happy to
carry on this pointless thread within this newsgroup, to which it has
absolutely no relevance (after all, that's what Richard A did, so it
must be "the right thing")
Dan Sumption
http://www.hardnet.co.uk/dan/
Richard Gunstone
My tolerance is finite. I cannot be bothered to continue this petty
argument.
I doubt other subscribers to this newsgroup want to see us hurling abuse,
and chewing bandwidth. I expect you agree.
I'll summarise: Don't post arrogant comments to me again, I don't want to
hear them.
Mr Ashton, if you cannot exercise discipline or tolerance in a newsgroup, I
feel really sorry for the people who have to deal with you face to face.
"And thats a rap" :)
--
-Richard- ric...@NOSPAMgunstone.demon.co.uk
Dan Sumption
On 8 Feb 98 12:24:03 GMT, mal...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net (Malcolm
Muir) wrote:
>The majority shareholder is Cliff Stanford. Last time I spoke to
>him he was not looking to 'sell up'.
Interesting then to find the following on http://www.campaignlive.com
today:
>UK's BT set to buy demon Internet
>April 3rd, 1998 13:57 GMT
>LONDON (Campaign) - BT is set to buy Demon Internet, one of the UK's
>largest Internet service providers, according to a report in today's Times.
>The prospective deal values the company at Ł60 million.
If Cliff kept it a secret from you Malcolm, isn't it slightly worrying
that I managed to find out from somewhere. Or is it just that he got
desparate and decided to sell up at the last minute? Next time, I'd
check your facts before posting.
>>No, that is not true. We have reinforced a floor in one of our
>>buildings (about 6 months ago), but that was planned and
>>structured action to permit development of the site.
I've since heard the tale of the collapsing floorboards from a couple
of other unrelated sources - obviously no proof of their validity,
could just be an urban legend, but it does lend some credence to the
story.
Dan Sumption
http://www.hardnet.co.uk/dan/
Malcolm Muir
Dan Sumption (d...@gulch.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> On 8 Feb 98 12:24:03 GMT, mal...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net (Malcolm
> Muir) wrote:
> >The majority shareholder is Cliff Stanford. Last time I spoke to
> >him he was not looking to 'sell up'.
>
> Interesting then to find the following on http://www.campaignlive.com
> today:
> >UK's BT set to buy demon Internet
> >April 3rd, 1998 13:57 GMT
> >LONDON (Campaign) - BT is set to buy Demon Internet, one of the UK's
> >largest Internet service providers, according to a report in today's Times.
> >The prospective deal values the company at Ł60 million.
>
> If Cliff kept it a secret from you Malcolm, isn't it slightly worrying
> that I managed to find out from somewhere. Or is it just that he got
> desparate and decided to sell up at the last minute? Next time, I'd
> check your facts before posting.
And I would suggest you do not credit the press with infallability.
> >>No, that is not true. We have reinforced a floor in one of our
> >>buildings (about 6 months ago), but that was planned and
> >>structured action to permit development of the site.
>
> I've since heard the tale of the collapsing floorboards from a couple
> of other unrelated sources - obviously no proof of their validity,
> could just be an urban legend, but it does lend some credence to the
> story.
Stories are always more interesting the truth.
Dan Sumption
On 3 Apr 98 21:33:16 GMT, mal...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net (Malcolm
Muir) wrote:
>Dan Sumption (d...@gulch.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>> On 8 Feb 98 12:24:03 GMT, mal...@muir-et2.staff.demon.net (Malcolm
>> Muir) wrote:
>> >The majority shareholder is Cliff Stanford. Last time I spoke to
>> >him he was not looking to 'sell up'.
>>
>> Interesting then to find the following on http://www.campaignlive.com
>> today:
>> >UK's BT set to buy demon Internet
>> >April 3rd, 1998 13:57 GMT
>> >LONDON (Campaign) - BT is set to buy Demon Internet, one of the UK's
>> >largest Internet service providers, according to a report in today's Times.
>> >The prospective deal values the company at Ł60 million.
>>
>> If Cliff kept it a secret from you Malcolm, isn't it slightly worrying
>> that I managed to find out from somewhere. Or is it just that he got
>> desparate and decided to sell up at the last minute? Next time, I'd
>> check your facts before posting.
>
>And I would suggest you do not credit the press with infallability.
Actually, I had heard of another couple of buyers earlier in the week
by word of mouth, and the day before this was published someone
mentioned to me that Demon were having talks with BT. Of course, as a
good Humeian, I would never accept any amount of empirical evidence as
being absolute proof, but there are different levels of credibility,
and it seems to me almost certain that something's afoot at Demon,
however much you may wish to deny it.
Dan Sumption
http://www.hardnet.co.uk/dan/