[Polymath20]

	Originally Posted by Eye on Earth
	Jezebel - is there a possibility that along with the new server came a new virus protection package for the forum? Perhaps the server is thinking that some connections are actually viruses and in term shuts them down. Just a thought - not sure if it really works that way or not.

Networking doesn't work that way. The HTTP/S requests go through an enterprise grade firewall (or at least they should) on the edge of the network. Antivirus only shuts down on-access file reads/writes which if the web server and database engine are working then they should have proper exclusions. My point is that it would affect everyone or no one. Antivirus would only be triggered if you were sending virus infected files.

[Eye on Earth]

Unless the server is infected already and is randomly closing connections at the firewall.

[Polymath20]

	Originally Posted by Eye on Earth
	Unless the server is infected already and is randomly closing connections at the firewall.

In all my experience with modern web, database, and firewalls, it's never arbitrary.

[Eye on Earth]

Mmm...that means Jezebel is doing it to me on purpose.

Why did you tell me you love me Jezebel? My heart is so broken right now. lol.

I would assume there is still something quirky with the new server that no one has figured out yet, and it could be arbitrary despite experience to the contrary. I would venture to say enough arbritary information exists to support a different opinion.

[Jezebel]

	Originally Posted by Eye on Earth
	Jezebel - is there a possibility that along with the new server came a new virus protection package for the forum? Perhaps the server is thinking that some connections are actually viruses and in term shuts them down. Just a thought - not sure if it really works that way or not.

No, but the firewall will block IPs for certain "suspicious" activity. I can confirm that the current settings are a bit too strict and some site users are getting blocked by the firewall by what seems to be normal usage for them. When users are blocked I get a notification so I would be able to track which forum members are affected. As I mentioned in a previous post, this is indeed the case for you and JackCY. This isn't the case for plotthickens, WoodsWoman or the other users I have checked so far. Even if these users are getting temp server banned under an IP they haven't used to actually post on the forum (and are thus unsearchable in the firewall logs), the number of daily alerts I'm getting about blocked users is not that high and it would not account for the number of users reporting problems.

I will adjust the firewall settings and hopefully that will alleviate your problem. The only hold up is that I currently don't have access to my primary desktop computer and I'm not in a good position to do server maintenance. As soon as I am, I will tweak the settings and let you know.

[Eye on Earth]

Originally Posted by Jezebel

No, but the firewall will block IPs for certain "suspicious" activity. I can confirm that the current settings are a bit too strict and some site users are getting blocked by the firewall by what seems to be normal usage for them. When users are blocked I get a notification so I would be able to track which forum members are affected. As I mentioned in a previous post, this is indeed the case for you and JackCY. This isn't the case for plotthickens, WoodsWoman or the other users I have checked so far. Even if these users are getting temp server banned under an IP they haven't used to actually post on the forum (and are thus unsearchable in the firewall logs), the number of daily alerts I'm getting about blocked users is not that high and it would not account for the number of users reporting problems. I will adjust the firewall settings and hopefully that will alleviate your problem. The only hold up is that I currently don't have access to my primary desktop computer and I'm not in a good position to do server maintenance. As soon as I am, I will tweak the settings and let you know.

That's cool. Thanks.

[WoodsWoman]

I began attempting to access at 7:14 AM, achieved access at 9:10 AM.

[JackCY]

	Originally Posted by WoodsWoman
	I began attempting to access at 7:14 AM, achieved access at 9:10 AM.

WoodsWoman infected my connection while trying to solve her inability to connect to the forum. It seemed like a failed DNS resolving for her. My connection went down again as well

Maybe we should vaccinate the fox!

My DNS is fine the problem seems to be the same as before, the server simply does not reply and I was able to traceroute all the way to the IP just before the server.

All I did was run maybe around 5 traceroutes from my IP and checked if my DNS working and to provide to WW how the output should look like from the commands when it does work.

14:27 CET/UTC+01:00

Tracing route to intjforum.com [209.236.114.19]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  8   105 ms   106 ms   106 ms  xe-8-2-0.was14.ip4.tinet.net [89.149.180.42]
  9   107 ms   109 ms   107 ms  cequel-gw.ip4.tinet.net [216.221.157.174]
 10   143 ms   145 ms   142 ms  173-219-236-26-link.sta.suddenlink.net [173.219.
236.26]
 11   140 ms   140 ms   141 ms  173-219-245-11-link.sta.suddenlink.net [173.219.
245.11]
 12   140 ms   140 ms   144 ms  173-219-246-93-link.sta.suddenlink.net [173.219.
246.93]
 13   142 ms   178 ms   141 ms  jbdr1.0.dal.colo4.com [206.123.64.41]
 14   139 ms   139 ms   139 ms  72.249.128.110
 15     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 16     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 17     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 18     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 19     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 20     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 21     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 22     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 23     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 24     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 25     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 26     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 27     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 28     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 29     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 30     *        *        *     Request timed out.

Trace complete.

I'm now back it's 15:50 CET/UTC+01:00.

On windows I get the INTJf IP in the traceroute at the end, on linux I never see it even when the connection is working fine. The above should be windows tracert.

I guess the temporary ban I get from the server firewall or something, lasts 1 hour or 1 hour and 30 minutes.

[vampyroteuthis]

Sometimes Chrome kicks me out and another browser works. Deleting cookies gets me back in after a while but only if I restart Chrome (which I'm reluctant to do because of always very important unread tabs that take ages to reload).

[Chameleon]

I should not have spoken yesterday! No access all night...I was soooo cold and lonely...

[vampyroteuthis]

Also, sometimes I don't delete cookies and Chrome lets me back in after a while anyway. Like now.

[Polymath20]

Hey Jezebel - what all was upgraded? OS? Web server application? Web core? I'm just curious. I've seen oddities like this when going to IIS because of "new features" and application pool conflicts. Had to turn on backwards compatibility stuff.

[IotaNull]

I don't think this an IP thing -- I had my connection interrupted while using the chatroom at about 5:30 my time (+/- 30 mins) and got the normal error when I tried to refresh.

[Jezebel]

	Originally Posted by Polymath20
	Hey Jezebel - what all was upgraded? OS? Web server application? Web core? I'm just curious. I've seen oddities like this when going to IIS because of "new features" and application pool conflicts. Had to turn on backwards compatibility stuff.

We didn't upgrade individual components; the site was moved from one server to another server. The software setup isn't a replica of the old server and it isn't necessarily even more up to date. I have had a few people look at the server's configuration to make sure there weren't problems that would cause some users to temporarily not be able to connect, but they have all said they don't see any reason I would have those problems. I'm open to the possibility that they could be missing something though.

[WoodsWoman]

I couldn't log on at 4:58 PM EST. I was able to get on just fine from one of the school computers, am home again now and no issues at the moment.

[Polymath20]

In my reading, someone mentioned that IPv6 can result in some intermittent oddities. Is it enabled on the server? If you're not using it, I recommend disabling it.

[Beesnthebreeze]

It's great! When I can get the page to load... There are huge periods of time where i told that the server cannot be found- sometimes 12+ hours

[JackCY]

	Originally Posted by IotaNull
	I don't think this an IP thing -- I had my connection interrupted while using the chatroom at about 5:30 my time (+/- 30 mins) and got the normal error when I tried to refresh.

For me it is, when it dies, forbids me to access the forum from my normal network I can still get here via a different network from different source IP address. Though it seems that for example WW's issue was a failed DNS resolve, not for me though.

[INFTPJ]

why did this forum is unavailable for all the morning and then again available near 12 am?
is it some ghost forum or what?

[WoodsWoman]

I'm on, but not at home, so accessibility seems only limited by the free WiFi here.

[Monte314]

I could not get on early this morning (03/07/13, before 0800), but everything was fine before Noon.

[Ray9]

Server not found again.

[Jezebel]

I created a new thread with a survey for those experiencing connectivity problems. Please post in that thread to report problems; I am locking this thread so I don't have to keep up with two threads about the same issue.