Folding Forum

Server 171.67.108.17 is a Collection Server, and as far as anybody has been able to determine, they never work. The problem with 171.64.65.102 should be reported in it's own topic, unless it already has been. Maybe a Moderator can move your post.

Posted the wrong IP, but nonetheless, the server status page showed "accepting" the entire time when clearly it was not. Obviously the "check" that is performed is not indicative of the actual server status.

there seems to be a lot of servers that are down. if servers are being overloaded, then maybe the assignment server needs to assign less clients to that project. Also if servers are going to be down for maintenance, it should be planned based upon the final deadline of a WU. If it is 7 days, then a week before the maintenance the assignment server should not assign any clients to that project.

I wonder if the server status page connectivity status is checked internally at Stanford, or from an external source. The servers could be online inside of Stanford, and offline to the rest of us.

In any case, I reported the server problems to Pande Group earlier today, and Dr. Pande responded quickly to fix it. http://foldingforum.org/viewtopic.php?p=152640#p152640

The server was issuing the 503 message, not an external source.

lanbrown wrote: The server was issuing the 503 message, not an external source.

Do you know how many servers there are between you and 171.64.65.102? Just run tracert and count. Routers are considered servers, too, and any one of them can issue a 503 error.

Last week one of the Stanford boundary routers had trouble. There was nothing wrong that could be detected inside the Stanford network. Moreover depending on which of the big backbone providers your packets decided to take from your ISP to Stanford, you might have seen the problem and you might not.

I'm a network architect and thus know networking extremely well. I have worked for several fortune 10 companies doing network architecture and planning. A router doesn't return a 503 message, that is too far up the OSI model for it. There are networking devices that could, but that is not the case in this instance.