BlueVM Leaving Kansas City

[Magiobiwan]

Begin Copy/Pasted Email:


Hello,


We have recently decided to move away from our Kansas City location. This is in part due to the poor network performance and consistent downtimes we've seen at the location. This move will occur on Wednesday, December 18, 2013 around 9 AM MST. The VPS in this location will be transfered to our Dallas, Texas location and assigned a new IP address. Since we're doing the migration we'll be transfering all VPS onto our new control panel Feathur at that time as well. Please feel free to open a ticket with any questions or concerns you might have.


Best Regards,


BlueVM Support Team


https://bluevm.com

 

[Nett]

Kansas city = WSI?

 

[DaringHost]

Kansas city = WSI?

From their "about us" page on their site it looks like they were indeed using WSI in Kansas City: https://www.bluevm.com/about.php

 

[Jack]

I thought BlueVM were not selling Kansas city but just keeping it for clients that wanted it?

 

[drmike]

Well, there goes any use I may have had with BlueVM

Recommendation:  Find some new upstream options.   All your eggs or too many are in the CC easter basket.

 

[XLvps]

Well, there goes any use I may have had with BlueVM

Recommendation:  Find some new upstream options.   All your eggs or too many are in the CC easter basket.

Come on over to Chicago. 

 

[drmike]

Wait, that means BlueVM is going IPv6 free, right?

 

[DomainBop]

We have recently decided to move away from our Kansas City location. This is in part due to the poor network performance and consistent downtimes we've seen at the location.

I think every low cost provider who sets up a location at WSI/Datashack eventually moves away for those same reasons...which is one of the reasons I won't even consider signing up for an offer in Kansas City. Lenoir, Scranton, and OVH/BHS are also on my list of VPS provider locations I avoid for similar reasons.

 

[Magiobiwan]

Drmike, we still have Zurich. And while we "had" IPv6 in KS, we didn't issue any blocks to clients because of HyperVM. If you have a dedicated server with us at WSI, I'll check on what our plans are for those. I have one and I didn't get a separate email with info on that, so I'm checking now and should have an update shortly.

 

[texteditor]

I think every low cost provider who sets up a location at WSI/Datashack eventually moves away for those same reasons...which is one of the reasons I won't even consider signing up for an offer in Kansas City. Lenoir, Scranton, and OVH/BHS are also on my list of VPS provider locations I avoid for similar reasons.

That, and every piece of hardware they own is statistically in its twilight years already, so I'd bet failures are pretty common

 

[peterw]

Good move to leave Kansas.

 

[drmike]

Shame, Kansas City *should* be a good location since it's closest to center of the US.  Facility everyone uses is hit or miss.   Not seeing tons of negatives about WSI lately.

 

[Francisco]

Shame, Kansas City *should* be a good location since it's closest to center of the US.  Facility everyone uses is hit or miss.   Not seeing tons of negatives about WSI lately.

Honestly WSI has always been able to keep a solid name minus when there was that huge fiber cut.

Joe's & Datashack have been a mess, though.

Francisco

 

[drmike]

Well, Joe's ran for eons with no battery backup and I am certain no generator.  Plus had been a one man show for time initially.  Know there is help there these days and pretty sure they got a generator in place.

Datashack is alright.  WSI owns them / co-owns them.  It's a remote location and most traffic gets backhauled to WSI.   The facility had cooling problems (building wasn't built originally as datacenter).   Problem I see from folks there is random throughput.  Haven't been impressed with raw throughput on supposedly totally open, non capped and entirely idle servers there.

 

[thekreek]

I only have one question, what will happen to the VPS that have the DirectAdmin license.

With the move, the IP will no longer work for the license.

Any more details on that matter bluevm?

 

[Magiobiwan]

Good question, thekreek. I checked, and unless WSI decides to be generous and continue the licenses for us (doubtful) you'll need to purchase a new one. We can offer them for $5 in Dallas CORRECTION: If you have a license NOW, we will be subsidizing the license for you after the move. You'll get a new license for DA, however we will be paying for it.

 

[Francisco]

Good question, thekreek. I checked, and unless WSI decides to be generous and continue the licenses for us (doubtful) you'll need to purchase a new one. We can offer them for $5 in Dallas CORRECTION: If you have a license NOW, we will be subsidizing the license for you after the move. You'll get a new license for DA, however we will be paying for it.

Are you sure Justin thought that through?

If you own your own IP space you're still looking at multiple dollars a month. I know the 'introduction' prices for VPS companies is $5/month. You have a good share of those $2/month 256's or 128's and things like that. You're pretty much taking a loss on every VM for no reason.

I'm all for doing right by the customer but I can't see the cost of licenses being cheaper than whatever the operating costs in WSI are...

Francisco

 

[BlueVM]

It's still very much up on our debate table... Jeff posted this thread without us confirming what we were doing one way or another.

There are three prevailing opinions:

1. They have a license now so they should have one after the move.

2. You get what you pay for and since they aren't paying specifically for a license we shouldn't pay for one for them.

3. We should subsidize those who wish to keep the licenses up to the cost of their VPS. So if the license costs us $5 and their VPS is $3 they either need to pay $2 more per month or they don't get it.

I don't like screwing people over, it's never been my business motto or my way of doing things... We don't have enough licenses active that it's going to break the bank one way or another and we aren't moving away from WSI to cut costs... the costs in Texas are actually about equal to those in WSI. I just got tired of the weekly tickets about the quality of service there. At least once a week the whole network would drop (likely due to a DDOS aimed at someone else) and we'd get tickets about it...

 

[raindog308]

These sorts of moves always strike me as grossly unprofessional:

• 48 hours from now, your VM is being moved
• We've decided to move it to Texas
• Oh, and we're giving you a new IP
• Oh and there will probably be some downtime.  Sorry 'bout that!

I suspect there's nothing in the TOS (which is a two-way document) or on the web site that says "you agree we can move your VM to a new location with 48 hours' notice and break any services you may be offering".

At a minimum, the provider should say "at your next service renewal (which is usually 30 days but could be longer) we are no longer offering service in KC but will be glad to continue your service in Texas."

Announcing a move on short notice maximizes provider convenience and says "our convenience is more important than yours, paying customer".

 

[drmike]

It's tough when these sorts of events happen.

Providers need to give weeks of notice.   Plenty of accounts are on autopilot and people don't have time to deal with migrations, especially with no real warning.

It's unfortunate that BlueVM is having complete network outages like that.  That's how things use to be 2+ years ago with attacks and response by facility (if that's the origin of the outages).

Someone needs to open something competitive in US Central that isn't Dallas or Chicago (which really isn't central).