[comp.org.usenix] service problem with uunet? cancel your acct, see what happens!

mis@Seiden.com (Mark Seiden) (03/26/91)

has anyone else had problems switching a feed from uunet to uupsi?
here's a good story for ya...  judge for yourself...

our machine (dagobah.uucp = seiden.com) was to be switched from uunet
to uupsi starting in mid feb.  it took more than a month to switch
over completely.

CHAPTER II, the most recent episode: (CHAPTER I, the flashback comes
later...)

psinet activated my account and filed the DNS updates (for seiden.com)
around feb 18, and claim to have copied hostmaster@uunet upon filing
the changes.  the changes made it to the NIC (since root name servers
were updated) and the NIC claims their normal procedure is to notify
the old SOA, uunet, which they should have done a few days later.  psi
apparently updated their uucp maps at least locally.

on mar 2 i informed uunet by email to cancel service, and they jerked
me around for several days wanting it in writing, meanwhile ignoring
my request on mar 4 that they change their name server and pathalias
database. cancellation was slightly complicated by the fact that
usenix assn originally ordered the service, though the usenix office
says they cancelled the service promptly and in writing.

so i turned off my polling of uunet, and went away on a business trip
for a week.  and mail to me from uunet-connected sites starting
bouncing.

in short, uunet neglected to apply any DNS changes until i prodded
them (several mail messages) around 21 Mar, and until today they
didn't changed their pathalias database, despite repeated requests,
and finally increasingly strident demands to do so...

i discovered today (25 Mar) that they *still* believed that i have an
active uucp account with them -- laurie leonard returned my phone call
(promptly) but said there was "no cancellation form in my folder", and
yes, she had received copies of my email but how could i expect to get
"help" from uunet when my tone was so "hostile"?  geez... i'm sorry to
be hostile, i just want them prettypleasewithacherryontop to let go of
my email... maybe you can't get *rid* of these people, they're like
some kind of plague?  

so i faxed it to them *again* today.  and usenix faxed it to them
*again*.  and finally, late today, they cancelled my account!  great!
but whaddaya know -- instead of pathaliasing my machine as they do for
every other mapped site, (i.e. uunet!dagobah becomes
uunet!uupsi!dagobah) now they just *bounce* it!  real nice guys...

this serves to illustrate that a highly connected site like uunet can
be tyrannical with one's mail, if they choose to.  why should they
cooperate with a change of carrier to a competitor?  and i thought
that allowing a couple weeks for the changeover would be enough!
(silly me!)  has anyone else had this problem?

or maybe it just has to do with why i cancelled my account in the first
place (not because it costs more (for a leaf node) than psi, though it
does...)

CHAPTER I, the flashback:

when i made several (past) inquiries on (those few) occasions when
uunet was down about *why* they had been down i received no response.
just silence.  once i *phoned* to report they were down and received
no response.  (slightly obnoxious when one calls on one's own
nickel)...

finally, i made what i thought was a contructive proposal (copies
available on request) for service improvements.  these involved things
like a hotline to report service problems, an answering machine/voice
mailbox to announce the current status in the event of a recognized
outage, a policy to announce all planned outages in advance and
account for any extended outages after the fact, and, in general, the
announcement of what the service policy *was*.

well, in short, i was told there isn't any.  in our only conversation
about it, laurie leonard said she is supposed to formulate one, but
that she hadn't yet, was unwilling to say when there would be
one or what would be in it, and refused to deal with any of the
substantitive points in my email, which i said spoke for itself.

i thought this was a rather unsatisfactory response for a service
provider, especially one as central to the scheme of things as uunet,
and i thought it was an important issue, so i started pushing a bit
(private email to people that i thought would have influence, namely
members of the boards of uunet and of usenix, which have some overlap)...  
and that resulted in this reasoned response from rick adams:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>From uunet!rick Tue Dec 18 16:51:35 1990 From: uunet!rick (Rick
Adams) To: mis@seiden.com Subject: Re: uunet unwillingness to make
statement of service policy Cc: leonard

I recommend that you cancel your account.  Its obvious that you will never
be satisfied and we have given up trying.

You're acting like a spoiled child who keeps screaming because he
doesnt get his way. 

We have no intention of giving in to your tantrums.

As you mentioned, UUNET is a business. I have just made a business
decision not to waste any more of our time on a customer who will
never be satisfied. 

I suggest that you try PSI at 1-703-620-6651. They seem to have adequate
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
to which I replied:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From mis Tue Dec 18 23:07:02 1990
Received: by seiden.com (4.0/1.39)
	id AA02713; Tue, 18 Dec 90 23:06:56 EST
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 90 23:06:56 EST
From: mis (Mark Seiden)
Message-Id: <9012190406.AA02713@seiden.com>
To: uunet!rick
Subject: your incredible response
Cc: board@usenix.org
Sender: mis
Status: OR

no thanks for your incredible response, the first personal
communication i've had from you despite sending several pieces of
email.

you're wrong that i would "never" be satisfied. actually, it would
take *very little* to satisfy me, but you made no attempt to even try,
and nobody at uunet ever managed to address any of the substantive
points i tried to make several times (increasingly loudly if only
because that seemed to be the only way to get your attention.)

i think you are making an error in misunderstanding my intentions.  i
have nothing to gain by engaging in this attempt at persuasion except
improvement of your (and my) service, and you have now made clear your
refusal to engage in any dialogue with me.

since you and i have no previous history of antagonism (that i know
of, anyway) i have little doubt but that your reaction in *this* case is
typical of your reaction to other user complaints, a reaction
completely inappropriate for a service provider.  simple business
courtesy would have sufficed.

your evident arrogance is especially unfortunate since you have had the
reputation of being a smart and competent person.

you are the problem, or the problem is in your head.  what is the
solution?

------------------------------------------------------------------
there was no reply.  well, maybe it ended with a rhetorical question...

CHAPTER X, the epilogue (not to be confused with the window system):

my opinion is that now that adams has managed to get usenix to
bankroll him into a nice profit-making business he doesn't want to be
bothered with little things like real customer concerns, and just
wants us little guys to leave him alone to run "his" business so he
can go for the *real* money, the commercialization of the internet...
i think it's inappropriate that he be on the board of usenix -- i
suggest he resign, which will give him more time to pursue his
concerns without creating the appearance of conflict of interest.

i am a bit confused why uunet found it so hard to get rid of me
after they invited me to leave.  maybe it's just incompetence?  naah.
could it be negligence?  or maybe they're out to get me? who knows...

would you put your business email in the hands of these people?

anyway, psinet *seems* to have a real commitment to service.  at least
they return my phone calls and even have an 800 number for the problem
hotline, and i have seen their announcements explaining outages (of
central resources) both before and afterwards.

i believe that psi did all the right things in effecting a change of
service, but uunet just didn't cooperate.  in such a situation i don't
know how they could be compelled to do so.  any suggestions?

we shall see how well psi's service scales with increased volume.  in
my opinion uunet was better before they became successful.  i wonder
whether uunet will end up the victims of their own success.  i know i
will try *real* hard not to have any dealings with with them in the
future, despite mouthings of lofty objectives from Olympus.

i don't want to have to be pals with my mail feeder (or with the
telephone company, or the electric company) to get acceptable service.
just give me businesslike behavior and some measure of accountability.

mark seiden, mis@seiden.com, 1-(203) 329 2722 (voice), 1-(203) 322 1566 (fax)

pacolley@violet.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Colley) (03/26/91)

To pick one point of Mark's article:

In article <3625@dagobah.UUCP> mis@Seiden.com (Mark Seiden) writes:
>
>on mar 2 i informed uunet by email to cancel service, and they jerked
>me around for several days wanting it in writing,

Hmmm, maybe you should look at the contract you signed when you
started service with them?

The contract I have clearly states that service can only be cancelled
by a request in ***WRITING***

Seems to me that you are being obstinate in not providing what you've
contracted to do...


(I presume this clause is because of the ease of forging Email, to
prevent other obnoxious people from cancelling your account).

- Paul Colley
  pacolley@violet.waterloo.edu or .ca
  "Quantum Mechanics:  The dreams stuff is made of"    - Ken Burnside

les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (03/27/91)

In article <3625@dagobah.UUCP> mis@Seiden.com (Mark Seiden) writes:

>*again*.  and finally, late today, they cancelled my account!  great!
>but whaddaya know -- instead of pathaliasing my machine as they do for
>every other mapped site, (i.e. uunet!dagobah becomes
>uunet!uupsi!dagobah) now they just *bounce* it!  real nice guys...

Ummm, most places just parse the maps the way they get them.  Is there
some reason to believe that uunet has a map entry showing your connection
to uupsi?  The one here still says you are connected to uunet.

Les Mikesell
  les@chinet.chi.il.us

booter@Autodesk.COM (Elaine M Richards) (03/27/91)

[You read the article, I ain't gonna repost it]

Yes, you *do* have to give them hard copy. I have used the FAX machine
rather than the post office and have called to confirm receipt. This is
the best way to do it. It still does not excuse the attitude I have run
into of "We have a zillion sites and cannot give you the service you
seem to be asking for."  Even Sun Microsystems will give you great
service if you throw enough money at them.

ER
-- 
E. Richards  fernwood!autodesk!booter or booter@Autodesk.COM

"A mere corroborative detail to add artistic verisimilitude to
 an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative."

mis@Seiden.com (Mark Seiden) (03/31/91)

to follow up on a couple of points that people have asked about...

1. i never read the contract nor did i sign the contract.
usenix association presumably did, since they ordered the service
to support work for them, and they cancelled it (in writing.)
(for a while i was uncertain whether i would be *permitted* to 
cancel the account, since i had never ordered it...)  usenix was
the customer in this case, not me...  so it's even stranger how
badly the termination was handled -- one would think usenix would be
in a position to be treated well rather than badly.  

2. i notified uunet in unambiguous words of one syllable at least 5
times that they should change their pathalias file to show
connectivity to uupsi.  they have consistently ignored this request,
and they ignored it even when they insisted i was still a customer
according to their records.  

3. i sent changed maps were sent to the uucp map project only recently,
and they have not yet apparently been distributed.  it was unclear to
me during the changeover whether psi would (or has) updated the uucp
maps other than their local copy of the map. nor did they tell me
whether i'm supposed to.

4. several people asked for the details of my service suggestions.  i
will post them (another separate long posting) in comp.mail.uucp.

mark seiden, mis@seiden.com, 1-(203) 329 2722 (voice), 1-(203) 322 1566 (fax)

time@ice.com (Tim Endres) (03/31/91)

In article <3626@dagobah.UUCP>, mis@Seiden.com (Mark Seiden) writes:
> 1. i never read the contract nor did i sign the contract.

Now here is an interesting point!

At ICE Engineering we learned a simple and valuable lesson one day.

We shipped the first copies of uAccess with a registration card that
had a field to be filled in with the software's serial number. We
thought, "Hey, better put a note on the card telling the user where to
find the serial number...". So we went to great trouble to fit in a
note telling the user that the serial number was in the "About..."
dialog box.

Well, much to our surprise (then laughter once we thought about it)
users started sending in cards with no serial number on it. Of course!
How many people read that card closely as they fill it in and get
every field right? None. And the most important field on the card
is blank! Stupid us. So now, WE fill in the serial number field by
hand.

MORAL: The moral here is that the user is anxiously *ripping* their
       new package open and firing up their NEW TOY!
       The user is **not** reading contracts. Hell, they rarely read
       the manual.

I believe companies should expend more effort to simplify their business
practices, with the customer in mind. In this case, couldn't UUNET
simply email back and ask the individual to FAX or mail a written
request? Couldn't they also have an email server addressed:
		"help@uunet.uu.net"
to send help to users on various subjects, including terminating service?

Aren't they supposed to be experts with this technology?

I know we now put the serial numbers on outgoing registration cards.

I also know we are working on one or two 20 page or less manuals with
lots of pictures for the "Getting Started" and "TroubleShooting" sections
of out current "big and thick" manual. Users want to play with new
software, not read 300 pages of manual, and we need them focused on
the important items when they are starting out.

In the end, the company wins with reduced support costs and happier
customers.

tim.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Endres                |  time@ice.com
ICE Engineering           |  uupsi!ice.com!time
8840 Main Street          |  Voice            FAX
Whitmore Lake MI. 48189   |  (313) 449 8288   (313) 449 9208