Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ShadowandLight
Dread Phoenix Society Black Core Alliance
67
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 14:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
Its constantly throwing errors |
Shin Chogan
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
7
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 16:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
ShadowandLight wrote:Its constantly throwing errors
+1 ... Its been throwing them since at least September, its just been getting worse. |
NickyYo
StarHug
335
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 16:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Why not tell your php code to re-try after 5 seconds if it throws an error? .. |
Acies Invictus
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 19:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
NickyYo wrote:Why not tell your php code to re-try after 5 seconds if it throws an error?
Because services that consistently timeout should still be fixed...
+1 to CCP fixing... annoying sitting in a long loop. |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
104
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 22:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
NickyYo wrote:Why not tell your php code to re-try after 5 seconds if it throws an error?
Yes... there is something clearly wrong with the servers so lets bash them with more and more connections.
*facepalm* ... |
Shellac Brookdale
RAZOR Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 23:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Whats even worse is that the API is responding with incorrect status codes such as "Key has expired. Contact key owner for access renewal (222)". Suddenly all my keys are flagged invalid, oh well.. |
NickyYo
StarHug
341
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 23:29:00 -
[7] - Quote
Maybee your all using the API to much? and CCP is throttling? I'm having no problems with it. .. |
Cyerus
Galactic Dominion Eternal Strife
83
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 00:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
Problems started when SSL was made mandatory. Requesting 5 seconds after failed attempt is just stupid, as it would involve double the traffic; might as well wait an hour and try again.
Don't forget that Dust 514 went open-beta today, which might have something to do with the instability. |
NickyYo
StarHug
341
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 00:57:00 -
[9] - Quote
Cyerus wrote:Problems started when SSL was made mandatory. Requesting 5 seconds after failed attempt is just stupid, as it would involve double the traffic; might as well wait an hour and try again.
Don't forget that Dust 514 went open-beta today, which might have something to do with the instability.
I think your right about the SSL, as the API call has to go through a 3rd party to get an encryption key. I think CCP implemented SSL for the upcoming CREST. so no one steals peoples access keys. .. |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
104
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 08:34:00 -
[10] - Quote
Cyerus wrote:Problems started when SSL was made mandatory. Requesting 5 seconds after failed attempt is just stupid, as it would involve double the traffic; might as well wait an hour and try again.
Don't forget that Dust 514 went open-beta today, which might have something to do with the instability.
The issues that surfaced when SSL was made mandatory were due to CCP using a newer certificate authority.
Older devices and machines that had not updated their lists of trusted root CA's would then fail to validate the cert as trusted.
NickyYo wrote:I think your right about the SSL, as the API call has to go through a 3rd party to get an encryption key.
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.... Do you just make up the stuff you don't know/understand? ... |
|
Bloemkoolsaus
Viperfleet Inc. Transmission Lost
57
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 08:54:00 -
[11] - Quote
My app checks and authenticates roughly 450 keys every day, I have experienced no problems at all. |
Shin Chogan
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
7
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 09:16:00 -
[12] - Quote
Bloemkoolsaus wrote:My app checks and authenticates roughly 450 keys every day, I have experienced no problems at all.
Do you want some logs to prove it ... unlike CCP my logs do show something :)
|
Bloemkoolsaus
Viperfleet Inc. Transmission Lost
57
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 09:56:00 -
[13] - Quote
Shin Chogan wrote: Do you want some logs to prove it ... unlike CCP my logs do show something :)
Prove what?? I did not deny you having problems, I only stated I'm not having problems beceause it could be an important detail for CCP to know that not everyone is experiencing problems. As a dev, i'm sure you understand such details?
|
NickyYo
StarHug
342
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 10:45:00 -
[14] - Quote
I'm not having problems either, what country you all from? i'm from UK.
And @ TheSkeptic
Why the sarcastic response? what is wrong with you people always gruntled where as i'm always happy!! :)) Anyways you miss understood me, every call you make to the api first starts of with getting the key resulting in slower pulling. I know what i'm talking about. .. |
Shin Chogan
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
7
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 14:18:00 -
[15] - Quote
I'm seeing these issues from multiple sites including one in the US and 2 in the UK ( one is through a proxy so I'm not really going to take it that seriously though ). I've seen it happen using ale and smf forum plugins that use php curl I've also seen it using curl and wget at the command line, as well as using Firefox and Chrome.
Traceroute from UK site is : traceroute to api.eveonline.com (87.237.39.199), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 st.telinformix.com (xxx.xxx.x.xxx) 100.049 ms 99.844 ms 99.709 ms 2 * * * 3 10.1.3.234 (10.1.3.234) 31.040 ms 31.163 ms 31.639 ms 4 * * * 5 10.1.4.249 (10.1.4.249) 39.941 ms 40.192 ms 40.746 ms 6 ethernet21-3.ar9.lon3.gblx.net (64.212.34.205) 47.875 ms 37.671 ms 38.367 ms 7 ae5.scr3.LON3.gblx.net (67.17.72.22) 33.105 ms 31.345 ms 32.019 ms 8 te7-4-10G.ar6.LON3.gblx.net (67.16.144.249) 39.132 ms 37.412 ms 37.960 ms 9 204.245.39.42 (204.245.39.42) 32.707 ms 32.145 ms 32.189 ms 10 srv246-f.ccp.cc (87.237.37.246) 32.068 ms 32.170 ms 32.350 ms 11 srv199-h.ccp.cc (87.237.39.199) 32.315 ms 32.805 ms 35.243 ms
Traceroute from US site : traceroute to api.eveonline.com (87.237.39.199), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 host.colocrossing.com (66.225.195.33) 0.537 ms 0.636 ms 0.874 ms 2 host.colocrossing.com (206.217.137.249) 0.619 ms 0.667 ms 0.666 ms 3 xe-2-0-2.ar6.ord6.us.scnet.net (50.31.154.181) 4.222 ms 4.253 ms 4.252 ms 4 ae6.cr2.ord6.us.scnet.net (204.93.204.66) 0.212 ms 0.223 ms 0.220 ms 5 ae4.cr2.ord1.us.scnet.net (204.93.204.86) 1.026 ms 1.026 ms 1.023 ms 6 ae6-102.cr2.ord1.us.nlayer.net (69.31.111.2) 0.862 ms 0.867 ms 0.858 ms 7 chg-s1-rou-1001.US.eurorings.net (206.223.119.95) 1.385 ms 1.756 ms 1.741 ms 8 nyk-s2-rou-1021.US.eurorings.net (134.222.232.37) 21.142 ms 21.149 ms 50.133 ms 9 nyk-s2-rou-1001.US.eurorings.net (134.222.226.41) 143.675 ms 143.684 ms 143.683 ms 10 ldn-s2-rou-1101.UK.eurorings.net (134.222.226.154) 117.702 ms 117.708 ms 117.702 ms 11 ldn-s2-rou-1041.UK.eurorings.net (134.222.228.94) 104.456 ms 104.450 ms 90.219 ms 12 134.222.109.173 (134.222.109.173) 88.889 ms * * 13 srv246-f.ccp.cc (87.237.37.246) 88.468 ms * * 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * srv199-h.ccp.cc (87.237.39.199) 90.642 ms 90.472 ms |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
104
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 14:30:00 -
[16] - Quote
NickyYo wrote: Why the sarcastic response? what is wrong with you people always gruntled where as i'm always happy!! :)) Anyways you miss understood me, every call you make to the api first starts of with getting the key resulting in slower pulling. I know what i'm talking about.
Don't make bad assumptions, I'm very happy.
But I still don't agree you know what you are talking about. ... |
Joe Skellington
Sarz'na Khumatari The Unthinkables
81
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 14:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
We need some discipline in here. Please note that ASCII art is not permitted in the forum signatures. Spitfire |
Shin Chogan
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
8
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 14:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
TheSkeptic wrote:Standard ssl handshake wont cause enough overhead for the issues we're observing. Also wouldn't the error message witnessed by out of bounds of the ssl handshake? From memory it was a server error?
It looks like some kind of ASP.NET error in IIS.
I'd also have hoped that they are using some kind of connection persistance so that the ssl handshake isn't necessarily done for each and every request from the same client. |
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
104
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 14:57:00 -
[19] - Quote
Shin Chogan wrote:TheSkeptic wrote:Standard ssl handshake wont cause enough overhead for the issues we're observing. Also wouldn't the error message witnessed by out of bounds of the ssl handshake? From memory it was a server error? It looks like some kind of ASP.NET error in IIS. I'd also have hoped that they are using some kind of connection persistance so that the ssl handshake isn't necessarily done for each and every request from the same client.
^^ this...
Also I was just able to produce the ASP.NET error using chrome on a non-cached (CCP API cache) request.
Pressing F5 then loaded the expected xml response.
... |
Shin Chogan
Blueprint Haus Get Off My Lawn
9
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 15:02:00 -
[20] - Quote
TheSkeptic wrote:Shin Chogan wrote:TheSkeptic wrote:Standard ssl handshake wont cause enough overhead for the issues we're observing. Also wouldn't the error message witnessed by out of bounds of the ssl handshake? From memory it was a server error? It looks like some kind of ASP.NET error in IIS. I'd also have hoped that they are using some kind of connection persistance so that the ssl handshake isn't necessarily done for each and every request from the same client. ^^ this... Also I was just able to produce the ASP.NET error using chrome on a non-cached (CCP API cache) request. Pressing F5 then loaded the expected xml response.
I accidently found a way of getting this error everytime in a script I wrote ... I was appending the keyID and vCode to the end of the url each time round a loop. Ended up with about 20 keyID's and vCode's in the url ... got the application error everytime thereafter - I guess it couln't handle the length of the parameters
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |