[TAG] ISP email goes down in flames

[Adam Engel]

Mike Orr wrote:

>I've been having an interesting twist on Rick's "use your own servers
>for everything" approach.  I used to have email going directly to my
>computer, but after periodic DSL outages and then losing the address
>completely when my apartment building burned down (the domain was a
>legacy one from the ISP and they had frozen changes on it), I decided
>to leave my mail on the ISP's server since they had "high
>availability" drives.  Last week they decided to upgrade their
>servers, and I haven't been able to access my mail for six days. 
>Thunderbird times out logging in, and their webmail (Squirrelmail)
>says "IMAP connection dropped by server".  I called the tech support
>Thursday and again today, and the standard line is, "We're upgrading
>the servers and it isn't going well, we're experiencing high latency,
>nobody can get in, and we don't have an estimated repair time."  OK, I
>don't want to take it out on the guy answering the phone, but how can
>an ISP go six days without putting an interim system in place?  How
>many of their clients were depending on those email accounts for
>business?  Couldn't they have at least warned us beforehand that mail
>might be interrupted?
>
>I'd set up this gmail account a few weeks before, mainly to try out
>the interface.  But due to the everyday poor quality of their
>Squirrelmail setup (timing out in the middle of page displays), I
>moved my beloved TAG subscription here.  Now it turns out to be
>prescient because this is the only way I can contact people ("don't
>use my other address, it's broken").  Yesterday I started thinking
>about all the password-protected sites I have accounts at, sites that
>use the other address for verification or to send invoices to. 
>That'll be a mess to straighten out, unless it fixes itself in a week
>or so.
>My mom gets medical announcements at her email on the same ISP.  We
>tried to log in yesterday but got the same problem, so I set up a
>gmail account for her.  (She has trouble remembering how to use
>Thunderbird, so we'll see if gmail is more intuitive.)
>
>I've been thinking for months about getting a virtual Linux server at
>one of those hosting companies, but haven't wanted to pay the
>$25/month.  This is giving me one more reason to.  Now if only I could
>reduce my ISP expenses by the same amount.  But you still need some
>way to get to the server, drat.
>
>--
>Mike Orr <sluggoster at gmail.com>
>
>+-+--------------------------------------------------------------------+-+
>You've asked a question of The Answer Gang, so you've been sent the reply
>directly as a courtesy.  The TAG list has also been copied.  Please send
>all replies to tag at lists.linuxgazette.net, so that we can help our other
>readers by publishing the exchange in our monthly Web magazine:
>              Linux Gazette (http://linuxgazette.net/)
>+-+--------------------------------------------------------------------+-+
>_______________________________________________
>TAG mailing list
>TAG at lists.linuxgazette.netcc
>http://lists.linuxgazette.net/mailman/listinfo/tag
>
>  
>
Who "owns" the "backbone?"  What or who gives one company the power to 
call itself an ISP, purchase and "lease" domain names, server space and 
other services?   Is there  a conceivable way to create "GPL" type 
licenses for ip addresses, name resolution etc?   I often have similar 
problems to the ones you described with Verizon, a major 
telecomminications player.  Does the fact that they lay down th  tracks 
give them fiat over the railroad?

 While there is a need for regulating bodies to prevent repeat names, 
settle "space" and server privilege disputes etc., I see no connection 
between this minimal "policing" and the services, such as they are, 
provided by ISPs if one is going to create his/her own TCP/IP/DNS 
configurations.   The rfc's are written by a "regulating body," which 
sets certain standards, as does POSIX, but no one pays for them -- as 
far as I know.   Who "owns" the Net?

Adam Engel