Timothy Linn
Lead Systems Engineer
Voip Innovations
--
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 21:29:15 -0400
From: Kraig Beahn <kr...@enguity.com>
To: "voiceops@voiceops.org" <voiceops@voiceops.org>
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability (N
s-boun...@voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of *Robert
> Johnson
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 17, 2016 3:43 PM
>
> *To:* voiceops@voiceops.org
> *Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
>
>
>
> Their primary SBC and DR IP are both in the same IP netblock, so whenever
> th
ell
*Sent:* Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:53 PM
*To:* Nate Burke
*Cc:* voiceops@voiceops.org <mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>
*Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
That is the issue a lot of our customers are reporting - where
multiple calls are sent
Down again. me.
-- Nathan
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Nate Burke
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 6:51 AM
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
Looks like it just came back up for me. Just over 30 min.
Nate
com>
Date: 3/11/2016 6:31 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: 'Nate Burke' <n...@blastcomm.com>, voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
...aand we're back.
-- Nathan
-Original Message-
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of
Nat
:peeip...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Friday, March 18, 2016 11:54 AM
*To:* Ivan Kovacevic <ivan.kovace...@startelecom.ca>
*Cc:* voiceops@voiceops.org
*Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
> Although this will probably draw a well worded and highly sarcastic
> retort,
erson <nath...@fsr.com> <mailto:nath...@fsr.com>
Date: 3/11/2016 6:31 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: 'Nate Burke' <n...@blastcomm.com>
<mailto:n...@blastcomm.com>, voiceops@voiceops.org
<mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP I
ting alarms this past
>> hour or so.
>> Up and down.
>>
>>
>> Original message
>> From: Nathan Anderson <nath...@fsr.com><nath...@fsr.com>
>> <nath...@fsr.com>
>> Date: 3/11/2016 6:31 PM (GMT-05:00)
>> To: '
LinkedIn
From: Pete Eisengrein [mailto:peeip...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 11:54 AM
To: Ivan Kovacevic <ivan.kovace...@startelecom.ca>
Cc: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
> Although this will probably draw a well worded and highly
ct Centers
| LinkedIn
-Original Message-
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Alex
Balashov
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:53 PM
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
On 03/17/2016 10:51 PM, Peter E wrote:
> If you
e: 3/17/2016 8:55 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
Ahem…
At a risk of this not being a popular point of view… I view issues with VoIP
Innovations as being largely self-inflicted.
Not only on part of VoIP Innovations (no relat
ge
From: Nathan Anderson <nath...@fsr.com>
Date: 3/11/2016 6:31 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: 'Nate Burke' <n...@blastcomm.com>, voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
...aand we're back.
-- Nathan
-Original Message-
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voic
.
>
>
>
> -- Nathan
>
>
>
> *From:* VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of *Nate
> Burke
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 16, 2016 6:51 AM
>
> *To:* voiceops@voiceops.org
> *Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
>
>
>
&g
eir SBC or did not reach it in a timely manner).
>
>
>
> -- Nathan
>
>
>
> *From:* VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org
> <voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org>] *On Behalf Of *Jeff Waddell
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:53 PM
> *To:* Nate Burke
> *C
ssage ----
>>>> From: Nathan Anderson <nath...@fsr.com>
>>>> Date: 3/11/2016 6:31 PM (GMT-05:00)
>>>> To: 'Nate Burke' <n...@blastcomm.com>, voiceops@voiceops.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
>>>>
voiceops.org<mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>"
<voiceops@voiceops.org<mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org>>
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
Message-ID:
<CAO+x49LG2+RQyRU6a0zmgdgaAKd0yYyxASHm6+=9z97idxj...@mail.gmail.com<mailto:CAO+x49LG2+R
their SBC or did not reach it in a timely manner).
-- Nathan
*From:*VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of
*Jeff Waddell
*Sent:* Thursday, March 17, 2016 2:53 PM
*To:* Nate Burke
*Cc:* voiceops@voiceops.org
*Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
That is the issue
Mar 16, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Nate Burke <n...@blastcomm.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Problems again this morning? Looks to be acting the same as it has
>>>>>>> been.
>>>>>>>
>>>>&
8:09 PM
*To:* Paul Timmins <p...@timmins.net>
*Cc:* voiceops@voiceops.org
*Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
I get it Paul. It's just a shame the terrorists win. Too bad we can't put a
bounty on their sorry asses.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 17, 2016, at 6:55 PM
On 03/17/2016 10:51 PM, Peter E wrote:
If you use a carrier and they are attacked, chances are you're going to
be impacted in some way, regardless if you are directly connected.
+1.
Direct connection vs. public Internet is irrelevant here.
--
Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC
o:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Nate Burke
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 3:27 PM
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
Annnd they're down again.
On 3/17/2016 5:14 PM, Nate Burke wrote:
6 calls from 4 different CID numbers. All within 3 minute
2016 6:00 PM, Alexander Lopez wrote:
>>>> I added them to our monitoring platform, stated getting alarms this past
>>>> hour or so.
>>>> Up and down.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Original message ----
>>>> From: Nat
iceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
Ahem…
At a risk of this not being a popular point of view… I view issues with VoIP
Innovations as being largely self-inflicted.
Not only on part of VoIP Innovations (no relationship) who, as it appears,
could have de
e: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
...aand we're back.
-- Nathan
-Original Message-
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Nathan
Anderson
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 3:30 PM
To: 'Nate Burke'; voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP
Bouncing up and down over the last half hour or so…
On Mar 11, 2016, at 18:31, Nathan Anderson wrote:
This message has no content.___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
Confirmed.
-- Nathan
-Original Message-
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Nate Burke
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 3:26 PM
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
More here: http://blog.voipinnovations.com/blog
Frank
-Original Message-
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Nathan
Anderson
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 8:27 PM
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
Holy schlamoly
is that they have had hit-and-miss service today.
-- Nathan
-Original Message-
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Nathan
Anderson
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 6:27 PM
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: [VoiceOps] VoIP Innovations reliability
Holy schlamoly
Holy schlamoly. Anybody else use them here and being handed outage after
outage over the last 2 days? Seriously thinking at this point about doing
something else. This is ridiculous.
I desperately need sleep and if my cell goes off one more time...
-- Nathan
29 matches
Mail list logo