Cant access a website that I use regularly

[#1]

I have no problem with 'verification' when (a) it has a purpose and (b) it is done correctly, otherwise it simply becomes a bugbear.

For example: one of my pet-hates are banks etc who offer text alerts (eg for withdrawals, unusual activity etc), but insist on them going to a mobile number. Why? If the customer has a land-line which is capable and configured to receive and display texts - as mine is - and it is more convenient for me to receive texts that way (rather than a mobile that is only kept for emergencies and therefore rarely turned on), why does it make any difference to them if I want to give them a land-line contact number instead? They never seem able to offer a convincing explanation.....

[#2]

---

@Nemo2000 wrote:They never seem able to offer a convincing explanation.....

---

Technical arrogance in believing that good mobile signal is universally available?  I live in a semi rural 'not spot'

[#3]

Well, now for my two penneth worth

I can understand why some entities would want to use geo locking on IP addresses, think Netflix, BBC, ITV etc., etc. that have licencing issues with users outside of the geographical 'viewing area' (for want of a better description) and on trying to use my UK Amazon Prime in the US found that I could view nothing, the geo locking does work.  (A call back from Amazon cured it after I asked for the geo lock to be 'turned off').  Now for the grumpy old man bit:  why oh why does SO need to use geo locking?  You have to be registered with a UK doctor to get an account, it's logged to your email address, why should they care where you order your repeat script from?  My missus regularly orders her repeat meds from the US just before we leave to come home (via VPN to our home network) so it's not as if they can really stop users doing it from outside the UK.

Finally @gregshaw I'm sure if we put our heads together, we could blame it on Brexit or Brexile or best case scenario Corbynoxious, 

PS I went for the fixed IP addy in the end and got a better DSL deal to boot at £7 less per month!!!  Bonus!

[#4]

I live on the edge of Norwich, close to Norwich International (ha ha) Airport and used (10 years ago) to get 5 bar service from Voda.  2 years after living here, the signal went down to 1 bar providing I hung (literally) out of the first floor landing window.  I complained, they sent a 'SureSignal' box or more accurately box of [-Censored-] so I left and went to 3.  Full service until 2 years since and down to 3 bar service.  It seems to me the problem is that due to the high churn rates these companies have, it's OK to have a customer that's been with you for 27 years leave and nobody cares.  I get really upset when one of my customers go elsewhere, even if they are a pain sometimes.  That's the problem with all big business, nobody cares anymore. * Sigh*

[#5]

Hey all.

Things are going on behind the scenes on this one.  We've a number of open conversations with systmonline about it which are progressing.    Because the range they are blocking is quite large, it's not simple for us to swap it out to a range which isn't affected.   Ultimately, their systems are either using incorrect out of date data, or they are looking at the wrong data somewhere and we need to convince them to change/fix it.

Can everyone who is still affected and needs access to this system ASAP please PM me with your Plusnet username.

[#6]

If it’s clear that SO are doing this incorrectly then surely the right recourse is for the users of that system to complain direct to SO telling them they need to sort out their act and to take responsibility for the behaviour of their system.

There is zero need for that system to apply a geolocation access restriction. One can envisage a clear business requirement to enable people returning from holiday to be able to place orders from overseas for collection on their return home.

[#7]

If you analyse this problem isn't the cause the shortage of UK originated IPv4 addresses? This fiasco being the consequence.

Either there needs to be one international database, which is unlikely to happen, or for there to be a migration to IPv6, this will take years. So any ISP that is expanding and having to get unused IPv4 addresses from overseas are going to have these problems, as are organisations that can't accept IPv6 connections.

Roll on IPv6!

[#8]

---

@Townman wrote:
If it’s clear that SO are doing this incorrectly then surely the right recourse is for the users of that system to complain direct to SO telling them they need to sort out their act and to take responsibility for the behaviour of their system.

---

From what I've seen posted, everyone that has done that, either directly or through their surgery, has had a response blaming Plusnet!

[#9]

Yes, my surgery told me that it was nothing to do with them and to contact systmonline (which I could not, due to this problem!).

They also said that there was nothing wrong with systmonline because they were getting repeat prescriptions coming through every day.

When I did email systmonline using a mobile phone, I have had no reply other than an automated reply, thank you for contacting systmonline.

Thanks Kelly for looking into it and also recognising the problem.

[#10]

Out of curiosity, I eventually found time to try using a UK-registered 'anonymous' proxy server to access SO - it worked! But it's so much slower via the proxy, nor would I want to keep using a proxy anyway, so I don't regard that as a permanent fix.

Point is - if SO works quite happily with input from a proxy server, which in reality is coming from a Plusnet 146. address which normally it thinks is USA-based and rejects, what is the point in SO's validation anyway??? It won't stop a serious hacker, whilst those who may be merely inquisitive won't get any further without a valid user-name and password anyway.

[#11]

If the use of geolocation data / restrictions is to mitigate hacking, then clearly they do not understand the problem they are seeking to mitigate.

Surgery and SO can argue the point as much as they want - they are still in the wrong. Using out of data geolocation data where no geolocation restriction is necessary is plain stupidity.

Even if ISPs could fix all of the wrong reporting of geolocation, if consumers are not refreshing such data, the problem will remain.

[#12]

I'm lucky in that I work with IT so I always have a UK (BT) VPN that I can log into from anywhere in the world that I can get the internet so I don't need to use a proxy service, but you're right, unless you pay 'proper money' for a proxy they are painfully slow.  I have bitten the bullet and purchased a static IP from PN, not for this SO problem but because it makes my life easier with other stuff.  You're also right in the negation of any serious threat to their service with geo blocking, it's ridiculous!

[#13]

---

@Baldrick1 wrote:

Either there needs to be one international database, which is unlikely to happen, or for there to be a migration to IPv6, this will take years. So any ISP that is expanding and having to get unused IPv4 addresses from overseas are going to have these problems, as are organisations that can't accept IPv6 connections.

Roll on IPv6!

---

Sadly IPv6 aint the cure either.

From post #604 in this Topic https://community.plus.net/t5/Plusnet-Feedback/IP-addresses-not-UK-Can-customers-please-report-any-p...

If you Google the geolocation issue, you'll discover that the basic problem is not unique to Plusnet or even the UK.  The problem becomes more aggravated when the difference indicates different countries.  And it isn't going to get any better with IPv6 - yet?

Check out this paper for an interesting read

If Geolocation is to become a usable reality lots more work still needed. 

[#14]

There can only be a full / proper resolution of this issue if ... registrars lose their sense of (or restriction of) presuming some locality attributatuon to IP ranges based on THEIR geolocation/ sphere. They could alternatively provide a secure and seemless transfer of IP registration (for example ARIN to RIPE) when use / location of ranges change.

It is my understanding that whilst most of the key location information can be set to be totally correct, there is one attribute which registrars refuse to allow to be altered. The resolution therefore is well outside of the control of any one ISP but rests with the registrar organisations and / or the data providers to ‘read’ the totality of the available information.

Thereafter it’s down to the service providers who apply geolocation restrictions - is the restriction necessary - have they chosen a quality data provider - are they keeping the provided data up to date?

[#15]

Don't get me started on IPv6!  Fortunately, I'm of an age where I'll be retiring before the debacle of v6 gets here 'in force' so to speak.  Already there are multiple issues with it that don't look like they'll get solved anytime soon and to be honest, I'm not even bothering to learn anymore about it, I'm done with it.  Every client I have has no need of it for now, when I'm done working, the new, shiny young guns can have their day and roll out v6 whilst berating me for not doing it sooner.  Geolocking, I'm guessing, will be even more of a nightmare, don't ask me why I think that because I couldn't give you a definitive answer but I see very black storm clouds on the horizon as they try to implement this new version of IP addressing.