

jbob

Reach Out and Touch Someone

Premium Member

join:2004-04-26

Little Rock, AR jbob Premium Member No Explanations yet They still have no explanation for the outage? Single point failure?



Epicfail

@rcn.com Epicfail Anon Re: No Explanations yet Single point of failure is the poor management team

ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23

Tuscaloosa, AL ISurfTooMuch Member So tell me again why landlines are better? OK, I know that U-verse voice is more of a VoIP service than a landline, but that's the direction that the telcos want to move in. So, when that happens, won't that negate any advantages of a landline in terms of reliability?



What I'm curious about is what could cause such a widespread outage. If it's a failure in a single piece of equipment, then it seems that AT&T's infrastructure isn't very robust. Not very comforting for something as important as telecommunications.



morbo

Complete Your Transaction

join:2002-01-22

00000 1 recommendation morbo Member Re: So tell me again why landlines are better? NSA cable switchover is causing some problems. Hold tight-- your phone, internet, and wireless communications will be 100% monitored by the NSA again very soon.

pandora

Premium Member

join:2001-06-01

Outland pandora Premium Member Re: So tell me again why landlines are better? said by morbo: NSA cable switchover is causing some problems. Hold tight-- your phone, internet, and wireless communications will be 100% monitored by the NSA again very soon.

All find and dandy, but what about the Mossad, MSS and KGB? Shouldn't we let the various interested parties install their stuff at the same time? Israel, China and Russia should be spliced in to assure fewer interruptions after this NSA upgrade.



Skywarn

@sbcglobal.net Skywarn Anon Re: So tell me again why landlines are better? I am very suspicious about this too..sounds to me from my experience that they are switching servers to run though NSA or homeland security.

funny0

join:2010-12-22 funny0 to morbo

Member to morbo

said by morbo: NSA cable switchover is causing some problems. Hold tight-- your phone, internet, and wireless communications will be 100% monitored by the NSA again very soon.



Hold tight-- your phone, internet, and wireless communications will be 100% FIXED BY OBAMA FRIENDS very soon. shhh your not supposed to tell them ... your supposed ot sayHold tight-- your phone, internet, and wireless communications will be 100% FIXED BY OBAMA FRIENDS very soon.



EliteData

EliteData

Premium Member

join:2003-07-06

Hampton Bays, NY EliteData to ISurfTooMuch

Premium Member to ISurfTooMuch

said by ISurfTooMuch: OK, I know that U-verse voice is more of a VoIP service than a landline, but that's the direction that the telcos want to move in. So, when that happens, won't that negate any advantages of a landline in terms of reliability?



What I'm curious about is what could cause such a widespread outage. If it's a failure in a single piece of equipment, then it seems that AT&T's infrastructure isn't very robust. Not very comforting for something as important as telecommunications.

from reading the forum posts, it sounds like hardware/power failure at a major facility.



MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11

Cherry Hill, NJ ·Verizon FiOS

(Software) pfSense

Asus RT-AC68

Asus RT-AC66

MovieLover76 to ISurfTooMuch

Member to ISurfTooMuch

Reliability is something that comes in time, newer technologies have growing pains. Remember when Verizon had LTE outages which are now a thing of the past.



And U-verse hasn't had a lot of widespread outages, this is the first I've heard of.



More reliability comes with time. POTS can have downtime too, but they are normally more localized.



What

@ensafe.com What Anon Re: So tell me again why landlines are better? Ok, Verizon just had outages in TN because it snowed! The towers wher overwhelmed!



FFH5

Premium Member

join:2002-03-03

Tavistock NJ FFH5 to ISurfTooMuch

Premium Member to ISurfTooMuch

said by ISurfTooMuch: What I'm curious about is what could cause such a widespread outage.

From what I read in the AT&T forum on the outage, it appears to be a problem with the DHCP servers that hand out IP addresses. They may have been doing a software upgrade on those servers and the software update bombed out.

b10010011

Whats a Posting tag?

join:2004-09-07

Bellingham, WA b10010011 to ISurfTooMuch

Member to ISurfTooMuch

Government regulation require 99.9% up-time on POTS lines or the carrier faces fines.

Kipper63

Premium Member

join:2012-12-30

Nashville, TN Kipper63 to ISurfTooMuch

Premium Member to ISurfTooMuch

Customers can opt for POTS phone (a real, traditional copper analog telephone line just like it's been for decades) and U-Verse VDSL. That arrangement separates telephone availability from internet service availability.



Dial tone is routed to the VRAD separately from Internet Service, but both travel down copper to the home. That means that if a storm were to cause a tree to fall and take out the line between your home and the VRAD, both phone and internet service would be down even you had POTS and U-Verse VDSL. However, if either U-Verse VDSL or POTS had a separate issue of its own before reaching the VRAD, only one service might be down at a time.



Similarly, for those thinking wireless is superior to a landline, if an issue interrupts the availability of cell towers in your area, your wireless service would be down but your landline and U-Verse internet service would remain up.



Most fiber runs underground. Most copper runs above ground. Microwave towers need line-of sight within a distance range to remain connected. Each has its own pros and cons, strengths and weaknesses of quality and reliability.

amungus

Premium Member

join:2004-11-26

America amungus Premium Member possible? Hmm, is it possible that this could be due to massive NAT failure?

I recall reading about some ISP's wanting to NAT out tons of IPv4 addresses since they are so 'rare' anymore... could it be that they were attempting to implement something like this, and it all fell apart?



Sorry to hear about all the fail. Taking it to a recent FB post is probably one of the only ways to reach out and touch them, being such a massive and impossible to penetrate tangled web.



ArrayList

DevOps

Premium Member

join:2005-03-19

Mullica Hill, NJ ArrayList Premium Member Re: possible? I'm going to venture a guess that AT&T has no shortage of IPv4 addresses.



NetFixer

From My Cold Dead Hands

Premium Member

join:2004-06-24

The Boro ·Comcast XFINITY

·AT&T DSL

Netgear CM500

Pace 5268AC

TRENDnet TEW-829DRU

1 recommendation NetFixer Premium Member Re: possible? said by ArrayList: I'm going to venture a guess that AT&T has no shortage of IPv4 addresses.







C:\>tracert -4 att.yahoo.com Tracing route to ds-any-ycpi-uno.aycpi.b.yahoodns.net [206.190.57.60] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 * * * Request timed out. 2 381 ms 401 ms 401 ms 172.26.248.2 3 359 ms 365 ms 368 ms 172.16.7.82 4 348 ms 406 ms 401 ms 10.251.11.32 5 365 ms 399 ms 474 ms 10.251.10.2 6 323 ms 349 ms 340 ms 10.252.1.1 7 315 ms 365 ms 337 ms 209-183-048-002.mobile.mymmode.com [209.183.48.2] 8 327 ms 370 ms 365 ms 172.16.75.1 9 339 ms 400 ms 388 ms 12.94.97.13 10 368 ms 399 ms 410 ms cr1.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.122.100.26] 11 340 ms 411 ms 364 ms dlstx02jt.ip.att.net [12.122.214.245] 12 340 ms 342 ms 389 ms 192.205.37.50 13 355 ms 365 ms 383 ms ash-bb3-link.telia.net [213.155.130.70] 14 350 ms 491 ms 414 ms ash-bb1-link.telia.net [80.91.248.161] 15 386 ms 443 ms 352 ms yahoo-ic-141068-ash-bb1.c.telia.net [80.239.193.54] 16 333 ms 398 ms 388 ms UNKNOWN-206-190-56-X.yahoo.com [206.190.56.13] 17 351 ms 411 ms 388 ms r1.ycpi.vip.dcb.yahoo.net [206.190.57.60] Trace complete.





The above traceroute example is on an AT&T Mobility 3G connection, but they are doing the same thing to U-verse in many areas (and the plan is to make NAT universal for all customers who do not pay for static IPv4 public addresses). Perhaps not, but they are nonetheless conserving their use by using NAT:The above traceroute example is on an AT&T Mobility 3G connection, but they are doing the same thing to U-verse in many areas (and the plan is to make NAT universal for all customers who do not pay for static IPv4 public addresses).

cramer

Premium Member

join:2007-04-10

Raleigh, NC Westell 6100

Cisco PIX 501

1 recommendation cramer Premium Member Re: possible? That's not "NAT". It's private addressing on the-internet-doesn't-need-to-talk-to-them internal routers. ISPs have been doing that for a decade! Yes, there are minor issues with router generated messages (ICMP), but I've found it to be rare. (and even then, it's the result of deliberate configuration(s) by the local admin(s). yes, sometimes that's *me*.)



NetFixer

From My Cold Dead Hands

Premium Member

join:2004-06-24

The Boro ·Comcast XFINITY

·AT&T DSL

Netgear CM500

Pace 5268AC

TRENDnet TEW-829DRU

NetFixer Premium Member Re: possible? said by cramer: That's not "NAT". It's private addressing on the-internet-doesn't-need-to-talk-to-them internal routers. ISPs have been doing that for a decade! Yes, there are minor issues with router generated messages (ICMP), but I've found it to be rare. (and even then, it's the result of deliberate configuration(s) by the local admin(s). yes, sometimes that's *me*.)

Network Address Translation:





C:\>hostname rws-wks C:\>ipconfig Windows IP Configuration Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : dcs-net IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.9.100 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 2601:5:c80:90:88f8:cb38:9ea:b79 IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 2601:5:c80:90:e291:f5ff:fe95:b69d IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::e291:f5ff:fe95:b69d%4 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.9.254 fe80::1e7e:e5ff:fe4c:e6ff%4 PPP adapter AT&T Mobility: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.185.97.169 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.255 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.185.97.169 C:\>dig rws-wks.dyndns-ip.com ; <<>> DiG 9.9.2 <<>> rws-wks.dyndns-ip.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 40851 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 1280 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;rws-wks.dyndns-ip.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: rws-wks.dyndns-ip.com. 60 IN A 32.150.98.172 ;; Query time: 125 msec ;; SERVER: 192.168.9.2#53(192.168.9.2) ;; WHEN: Tue Jan 22 16:18:56 2013 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 66

With a private local IP address of 10.185.97.169, and a different public Internet IP address of 32.150.98.172, it most definitely isetworkddressranslation:

cramer

Premium Member

join:2007-04-10

Raleigh, NC Westell 6100

Cisco PIX 501

1 recommendation cramer Premium Member Re: possible? Well, yeah. That's NAT. I was just going on the traceroute showing private addresses, which is quite common these days.



Mobile networks have been known to do that for at least 8 years now? I remember my older Cingular phone having two WAP profiles... one for "VPN" that was public IP and the other was NAT'd. (the former was an additional cost add-on. naturally.) Honestly, I never bother to look at the address a phone gets -- I don't need to get to it directly over the internet, so "it's never come up".



Selenia

Gentoo Convert

Premium Member

join:2006-09-22

Fort Smith, AR 1 recommendation Selenia to NetFixer

Premium Member to NetFixer

said by NetFixer: said by cramer: That's not "NAT". It's private addressing on the-internet-doesn't-need-to-talk-to-them internal routers. ISPs have been doing that for a decade! Yes, there are minor issues with router generated messages (ICMP), but I've found it to be rare. (and even then, it's the result of deliberate configuration(s) by the local admin(s). yes, sometimes that's *me*.)

Network Address Translation:





C:\>hostname rws-wks C:\>ipconfig Windows IP Configuration Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : dcs-net IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.9.100 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 2601:5:c80:90:88f8:cb38:9ea:b79 IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 2601:5:c80:90:e291:f5ff:fe95:b69d IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::e291:f5ff:fe95:b69d%4 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.9.254 fe80::1e7e:e5ff:fe4c:e6ff%4 PPP adapter AT&T Mobility: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 10.185.97.169 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.255 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 10.185.97.169 C:\>dig rws-wks.dyndns-ip.com ; <<>> DiG 9.9.2 <<>> rws-wks.dyndns-ip.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 40851 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 1280 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;rws-wks.dyndns-ip.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: rws-wks.dyndns-ip.com. 60 IN A 32.150.98.172 ;; Query time: 125 msec ;; SERVER: 192.168.9.2#53(192.168.9.2) ;; WHEN: Tue Jan 22 16:18:56 2013 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 66





With a private local IP address of 10.185.97.169, and a different public Internet IP address of 32.150.98.172, it most definitely isetworkddressranslation: AT&T Mobile and most other mobile providers have been doing that for years and years. Some also have a transparent proxy that gives an NAT effect, but also compresses certain web data. Given the low res of cell phone screens vs pc screens(even high res mobile screens are too small to see the detail a pc can provide), this can actually be good for capped web users. Not so good for running a server, which one would not want to do on a capped connection, anyways. NAT traversal in mobile VoIP clients has advanced to a point this does not bother me. Fixed line has not taken to this tactic in the US yet. The network topology of a fixed line network is much different than most mobile networks. Besides, all these mobile devices that are always online would kill far more of the IP address pool than computers. Think of the number of families where each member runs an internet enabled phone 24/7. Most people turn off their PC sometimes. Most families with multiple PCs opt for a router instead of separate lines, which uses 1 IP 24/7 per family/household. A family with 5 phones without mobile being NATed would use 5.



NetFixer

From My Cold Dead Hands

Premium Member

join:2004-06-24

The Boro ·Comcast XFINITY

·AT&T DSL

Netgear CM500

Pace 5268AC

TRENDnet TEW-829DRU

1 recommendation NetFixer Premium Member Re: possible? The whole point of my original post was that AT&T is utilizing their AT&T Mobility experience and is starting to implement NAT for their U-verse customers too. It is not done in all areas yet, but that is their plan.



Search the news and U-verse forum on this site if you want to see the official AT&T announcements and discussions of the implementation.



Selenia

Gentoo Convert

Premium Member

join:2006-09-22

Fort Smith, AR Selenia Premium Member Re: possible? Anything I could dig up on Google or our own search here seems like a load of FUD to me. People were bugging out about the need to switch internal LAN addresses and AT&T's statement that they are taking measures to more efficiently use IPv4 addresses. Only confirmation we have is random forum people who supposedly talked to X person from AT&T, who may be telling the truth, but talked to an uninformed rep(happens to me with any provider, but I know tech enough to sniff it out). A forum member may have hit it on the head though. AT&T may be switching to private addresses for internal IPTV services and such(maybe even DNS and other customer-only services), which would make perfect sense. AT&T does this on wireless. Such servers are routable to their customers, but try reaching them from another provider. Not going to happen. Given I could not dig up any reports of NATed users almost a year after this mandatory internal LAN IP change, it only makes sense that it is most likely AT&T allocating internal servers internal addresses, which an LAN address in the same range would have the router thinking you're trying to access a LAN resource instead of said AT&T servers. It makes just as much sense as the FUD that has yet to materialize. Think about it.

Selenia 2 edits Selenia to NetFixer

Premium Member to NetFixer

I have a link of my own that refutes your theory thus far » wiki.vuze.com/w/Bad_ISPs ··· _America Before jumping to conclusions, look at note 11 under unresolvable NAT problem for ADSL2+ HSI(which VDSL isn't noted to cause an NAT problem at all, neither is regular ADSL): "Note 11: The Motorola 2210-02-1ATT DSL modem (and probably also the other DSL modems that work with U-verse ADSL2+ HSI) does not have a bridge mode and is apparently overwhelmed by the different number of nodes communicating with your PC over DHT. Disable DHT as a work-around, and possibly also reduce the total number of connection allowed by your BitTorrent client to 100 or so." A better solution to me would seem to be to ask for a different model gateway. No idea why TWC is on the list of limiting BT bandwidth and unresolvable NAT problem, as a side note. I always get incoming connections and I can get full speed from Linux ISO torrents that I download and seed without a VPN. In fact, one reason I torrent them is that it's often the only way to max out my line on such downloads, which can be a few gigs(making you want to max it out), besides wanting to help the community.



battleop

join:2005-09-28

00000 battleop to NetFixer

Member to NetFixer

You are comparing apples an oranges here. UVerse does not have the same network design as AT&T Wireless. All mobile carriers NAT their customers.



Selenia

Gentoo Convert

Premium Member

join:2006-09-22

Fort Smith, AR Selenia Premium Member Re: possible? See my post above. He is yet another chicken little thinking the sky is falling because people had to move from a 10.x.x.x LAN address before world IPv6 day and AT&T stating they are trying to conserve IPv4 addresses. I believe they just want the 10 block for internal servers to route internally and save IPv4 addresses. Try telling that to these guys, though, who always think AT&T is evil. Maybe the company is, but I have received better customer service from them than the likes of TWC and Verizon, to name a couple.

cramer

Premium Member

join:2007-04-10

Raleigh, NC cramer Premium Member Re: possible? Indeed. It's (Uverse CGN) all been speculation to this point. IMO, the most likely logical reason for remove 10/8 from CPE networks is to use 10/8 for their VOICE AND VIDEO network, which co-mingles with the customers internet traffic.

funny0

join:2010-12-22 funny0 to amungus

Member to amungus

said by amungus: Hmm, is it possible that this could be due to massive NAT failure?

I recall reading about some ISP's wanting to NAT out tons of IPv4 addresses since they are so 'rare' anymore... could it be that they were attempting to implement something like this, and it all fell apart?



Sorry to hear about all the fail. Taking it to a recent FB post is probably one of the only ways to reach out and touch them, being such a massive and impossible to penetrate tangled web.

ooops we thought AT&T was copyright infringing and seized its domain name ROFL



fcp

@spcsdns.net fcp to amungus

Anon to amungus

Probable. When they told me that I had to switch my internal 10.x to a 192.168 I knew there was going to be a trouble with their design I should have cancelled then.



jjoshua

Premium Member

join:2001-06-01

Scotch Plains, NJ jjoshua Premium Member Don't complain via twitter Everyone should pay their bill a few days late when this happens.

slckusr

Premium Member

join:2003-03-17

Greenville, SC slckusr Premium Member Re: Don't complain via twitter said by jjoshua: Everyone should pay their bill a few days late when this happens.

You lose then and ATT benefits by reaping in a late payment fee.

funny0

join:2010-12-22 funny0 Member Re: Don't complain via twitter said by slckusr: said by jjoshua: Everyone should pay their bill a few days late when this happens.



You lose then and ATT benefits by reaping in a late payment fee. if 30 million people paid late they might panic actually



jjoshua

Premium Member

join:2001-06-01

Scotch Plains, NJ jjoshua to slckusr

Premium Member to slckusr

said by slckusr: You lose then and ATT benefits by reaping in a late payment fee.

Nah. I have never had a utility company charge a late fee or interrupt service for late payment.

your moderator at work hidden :

tkdslr

join:2004-04-24

Pompano Beach, FL tkdslr Member My bet.. DHCP servers crashed.. And forgot all the existing IP address lease assignments..



When it comes back up.. it starts handing out already leased(still in use) IP addresses.. to newly rebooted boxes.. I.E. A real mess.



People who left their boxes plugged in/on.. stayed on.. sort of, until a the freshly restarted u-verse box get's a dup'd DHCP IP assignment. Then the games begin.



This type of mayhem could continue on for several days. (depending on DHCP lease interval).



Metatron2008

Premium Member

join:2008-09-02

united state Metatron2008 Premium Member The REAL reason for the crash Is that Uverse is run by At&t.



shortyd999

join:2008-10-21

Birmingham, AL shortyd999 Member Info We were told there are 32 VHOs are affected by the outage and the DHCP server in TX. No ETR or what cause the outage.



Kara

@comcast.net Kara Anon TOS covered when att has outages Sorry but terms of service will cover their butts when outage ect happen don't matter that is phone or tv same apply. Try reading it

Kearnstd

Space Elf

Premium Member

join:2002-01-22

Mullica Hill, NJ Kearnstd Premium Member Re: TOS covered when att has outages TOS will not save them from a court battle though. TOS allows for outages yes, But they might still have to "face the music" from the franchise authorities due to the outage going over 24hrs and not being nature related.



Mr Anon

@k12.il.us Mr Anon Anon Glad I missed it. I feel bad for all those having issues but my service Oak Lawn IL, is fine.



maartena

Elmo

Premium Member

join:2002-05-10

Orange, CA maartena Premium Member Southern California still up Glad I still have internet

djnrg787

join:2009-06-10

Saint Louis, MO djnrg787 Member uverse Glad it wasnt the midwest i just had someone switch from flaky cable and told them uverse is much more reliable lol. Ive seen those 172...... addresses here and there at clients they seem like they are internal to att however when accessing them via other providers they still have external access.



Helene

@mycingular.net Helene Anon Re: uverse Our Internet is down about 12 hours now and we are in St Louis



EliteData

EliteData

Premium Member

join:2003-07-06

Hampton Bays, NY EliteData Premium Member hmm they are very quiet on their FB page about this but if you post something related but off topic they are quick to remove it.



drjosh121

join:2002-01-06

Matthews, NC drjosh121 Member Online Charlotte NC back online



Smith6612

MVM

join:2008-02-01

North Tonawanda, NY Ubiquiti Unifi Security Gateway

Ubee E31U2V1

Ubiquiti UniFi AP-AC-HD

Smith6612 MVM Eggs in one basket Sounds like the case of the 'ole Eggs in One Basket deal and someone decided to step on the basket rather than spill an egg. I've always wondered why AT&T, Verizon and the like seem to have massive regional outages that take ages to be resolved. In the case of Verizon, it seems once a year a key router in the Northeast takes a dump and breaks about 90% of Internet access that often takes nearly a day to get fixed. I don't know if they're overdue for an outage but Verizon hasn't had their routing fail since last summer.



Granted, even redundancy is capable of breaking as seen with Amazon's hosting service many times but I'm surprised there are not some additional safeguards built in to stop huge outages like this.



The lack of communication is not very assuring though. Sometimes giving customers a technical reason for why something is down is helpful.



graysonf

MVM

join:1999-07-16

Fort Lauderdale, FL graysonf MVM Addicted for sure. "Many users tell me they've been on hold for hours....."



Is there a twelve step program for this?



Uverse Emp

@rr.com Uverse Emp Anon Uverse down of course Uverse is down due to major problems with cicso server equipment and it is just about all south east and west states. Not eta and it might be a long long time since it started yesterday better off going back to prev provider



Columbus Oh

@myvzw.com Columbus Oh Anon Canceled U-Verse Due to the service outage. Just canceled my U-Verse and switched to WOW, scheduled for install tomorrow. AT&T gave me a refund for last month with few questions asked.



tommytorres

@mycingular.net tommytorres Anon Glad I still have dsl and have not upgraded to uverse! My dsl working on the old tdm network is working just fine.

So much for the new stuff........



mackey

Premium Member

join:2007-08-20 0.9 2.0

mackey Premium Member Re: Glad I still have dsl and have not upgraded to uverse! said by tommytorres : My dsl working on the old tdm network is working just fine.

So much for the new stuff........





/M Several months before we switched to Uverse, our "old stuff" DSL line went down for ~20 hours due to a problem with the PPP server. I don't think this new stuff is any less reliable then the old stuff was./M