403 Forbidden [Archive]

alex_walke

14-06-2005, 00:04

forgive me for trying to access this site but i was told it was funny.......one problem, is this came up:

Forbidden

You don't have permission to access / on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. Apache/1.3.33 Server at www.chavscum.co.uk Port 80 :confused:

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:06

Seems to be working ok here.

You may be experiencing problems with the transparent proxy.

What internet browser are you using?

Chris W

14-06-2005, 00:08

tools-> internet options-> connections

then take the tick out of use a proxy server and the other two boxes.

if there is nothing ticked there at the moment post back

nffc

14-06-2005, 00:09

works for me too.

alex_walke

14-06-2005, 00:13

im using IE6 XP SP2 im using Actiontec Wireless pack as well if thats got anything to do with it?

nothing ticked in the boxes

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:15

im using IE6 XP SP2 im using Actiontec Wireless pack as well if thats got anything to do with it?

Shouldn't have. More likely a proxy problem.

Did you do as Monkeybreath suggested above?

nffc

14-06-2005, 00:15

No idea. Try a tracert on it:

1. Open a command prompt in the usual manner (easiest is Flag+R and type "cmd", press enter)
2. type "tracert chavscum.co.uk" and press enter
3. see where it drops

alex_walke

14-06-2005, 00:19

Shouldn't have. More likely a proxy problem.

Did you do as Monkeybreath suggested above?

yep, no change
__________________

No idea. Try a tracert on it:

1. Open a command prompt in the usual manner (easiest is Flag+R and type "cmd", press enter)
2. type "tracert chavscum.co.uk" and press enter
3. see where it drops

done that, i cant copy and paste though :(

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:20

Ok,

Follow the instructions here:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/article.php?a=21

To add a new proxy server from this list here:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/article.php?a=10

The proxy server address is the bit after the = sign

Baguley 1 = bagu-cache-1.server.ntli.net
__________________

To copy and paste from the command prompt:

Right click on the left hand end of the title bar and select Edit > Mark
Highlight the bit you want to copy
Hit Enter

Now go to where you want to paste and hit Ctrl + V

nffc

14-06-2005, 00:22

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:23

You'll probably have to try one or two before you get it working right.

danielf

14-06-2005, 00:25

done that, i cant copy and paste though :(

Try clicking the litle c:\ icon in the top left corner of the command prompt box. Then choose edit, select all etc. It's not obvious at all, but you can copy/paste from the command prompt.

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:26

Try clicking the litle c:\ icon in the top left corner. Then choose edit, select all etc. It's not obvious at all, but you can copy/paste from the command prompt.

To copy and paste from the command prompt:

Right click on the left hand end of the title bar and select Edit > Mark
Highlight the bit you want to copy
Hit Enter

Now go to where you want to paste and hit Ctrl + V

alex_walke

14-06-2005, 00:27

command prompt:

Tracing route to chavscum.co.uk [64.34.170.10]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 192.168.0.1
2 11 ms 8 ms 9 ms 10.130.15.254
3 18 ms 59 ms 33 ms lutn-t2cam1-a-v108.inet.ntl.com [80.4.118.93]
4 24 ms 9 ms 14 ms lutn-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [213.107.47.
89]
5 11 ms 30 ms 10 ms pop-bb-a-so-410-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.61]
6 29 ms 12 ms 14 ms win-bb-b-so-500-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.202]
7 12 ms 27 ms 12 ms bre-bb-a-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.197]
8 12 ms 12 ms 27 ms redb-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.106]
9 15 ms 13 ms 15 ms linx-gw1.peer1.net [195.66.224.156]
10 90 ms 89 ms 89 ms oc12-pos5-0.nyc-telx-dis-a.peer1.net [216.187.11
5.225]
11 96 ms 94 ms 95 ms oc48pos0-0.wdc-sp2-cor-2.peer1.net [216.187.115.
222]
12 * 95 ms 95 ms oc48-pos6-0.wdc-sbsp2-dis-2.serverbeach.com [216
.187.115.242]
13 94 ms 95 ms 94 ms server1.arboreal.co.uk [64.34.170.10]
Trace complete.

Changed proxy server to Baguley and the site now WORKS. So the problem is likely to be the LUTON servers????

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:29

Sounds like it.....

You might want to try reversing the steps in a day or two, they will probably sort themselves out at some stage in the future.....

danielf

14-06-2005, 00:30

<insert condescending stuff>

Sorry boss, I was only trying to help :( :)

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:31

Sorry boss, I was only trying to help :( :)

:LOL: Was only messing..... I've done the same thing more times than I care to think about :)

:hugs:

danielf

14-06-2005, 00:33

:LOL: Was only messing..... I've done the same thing more times than I care to think about :)

:hugs:

See, I had to check if all the steps were correct as well, so as to not confuse the OP :)

alex_walke

14-06-2005, 00:33

right so if i get those type of messages in the future i will try changing proxy servers, cheers everyone

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:39

See, I had to check if all the steps were correct as well, so as to not confuse the OP :)

Nice to know that you're looking after me and the OP so well :tu: You're doing a stirling job, keep it up :D
__________________

right so if i get those type of messages in the future i will try changing proxy servers, cheers everyone

Yep, always worth a try at changing the p(r)oxy server.

Best bet (before you go to too much trouble) is to see if anybody else can access the site. If nobody can get to it then it's probably down. If you're the only one that can't then it's worth doing the proxy shuffle.

Don't forget that you currently have one enabled though, always worth turning the current one off before you go trying any new ones, just in case it's that that is causing the problem.

Chris W

14-06-2005, 00:45

this is a general request -

please do not specify a proxy server unless absolutely necessary

having thousands of users specifying particular proxies really ballses up the load balancing- if there are issues they are normally caused by crap website coding meaning that the proxy ip is detected instead of the real ip- resulting in a ban.

I give up on sites that don't bother implementing [simple] scripts that detect the actual visitors ip instead of a proxy server.

If you have problems with a particular site it is best to raise this to ntl who can then negociate with a site admin if necessary to get a proxy removed from a ban list- the UK's biggest broadband ISP have a lot more bargaining power than an individual user ;)

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 00:47

this is a general request -

please do not specify a proxy server unless absolutely necessary

:shrug:

<Edit>

Whilst I understand the setiment behind the post, and appreciate that you are trying to make people aware that simply selecting an alternate proxy is not the best resolution to all their problems, I would have to question whether or not your average user will really be interested in NTL's load balancing issues.

They pay for a service, the service fails to delivery what it should (or at least, that's their perception, so they take steps to correct that (by setting a proxy manually). From their point of view, problem solved. However I appreciate that this "ballses" things up from NTL's point of view.

If this is a serious issue for NTL then perhaps they should be taking steps to overcome it?

</Edit>

greencreeper

14-06-2005, 01:35

Chris W

14-06-2005, 01:49

I'm with Raistlin - if I want to view a site, then I'll change proxy so I can. There have long been problems with some sites, notably Yahoo, and nothing has changed. Likewise, there have long been problems with NTL proxy servers, and little has changed. Sometimes the transparent proxy just stops functioning correctly :shrug:

I agree with what you are saying, but if problems are not reported to ntl who can they even begin to do something about it? I have escalated a lot of proxy problems through this site [which btw takes a lot of my own time because i have to test at least two whole ranges of proxies before escalating, and have to do it in my own time] and i don't begrudge doing it, but i am just trying to get the point across that ntl need to know about problems in order to fix them.... it is completely unrealistic for ntl to test every single site through every single proxy 24hours a day.........

Raistlin

14-06-2005, 01:56

Perhaps NTL should be looking at a better solution than simply relying on the good will of one man to test two whole ranges of proxies in his own time (thanks by the way)?

Surely there must be some change that they can implement within the underlying technology that prevents these problems from happening in the first place? Although I could be wrong, I obviously don't fully understand the technology.

Like green says, this has been a problem with the transparent proxies for as long as I can remember - you'd think that they would have tried to do something about it by now.
__________________

Anyway, the idea of phoning NTL to tell them that I can't access one website out of the millions that are available is just laughable.

greencreeper

14-06-2005, 02:01

MB - I have a lot of respect for you and your attitude to customer services is exemplary, but you're in the minority. I know from where I work that if a customer gets a new guy, the chances of successful problem resolution are slim, especially if it's a weird problem that requires experience to solve it. I also know that the majority of staff where I work are stats driven, and care little for customer service. There's a thread on this forum where it seems highly likely that the poster spoke to a new NTL tech, who didn't have a clue. At the moment, I'm have no confidence that phoning NTL to report that I cannot, or have problems, accessing a website will result in anything. Recently I had problems with my connection and after speaking to another NTL employee on this site, I decided to do nothing, as he suggested, and let the network monitoring folks detect the problem, which they seem to have done (unless the problem has resolved itself). I don't honestly believe a tech on the phone would have helped - partly because all the CM lights were on. IME, lights on = no problem. I've basically lost confidence and I'm a tough cookie to get fifth+ chances out of :)

:Peaceman:

Chris W

14-06-2005, 02:15

<snip>

i see your point.... but bear in mind i am just one of the people at the end of the phone....

there are those who care and those who don't, and that will be the way with any company...

anyway this has gone off topic now... the OP's problem was resolved [or at least bodged] so i think any other comments can be taken to PM if need be (as i have done with other members in this thead, who seem now seem intent on making [not so] subtle digs at me in the public forum....)

I agree partially with what you were saying, but the point i was trying to make is that "bodging" only works in the short term, and does not help resolve long term issues- if ntl were inundated with calls about proxy problems maybe they would do more to resolve them :shrug:

simbr

14-06-2005, 07:38

Normally I recommend always using a proxy from your local group (unlike others who, e.g., always give the same manchester one). In this case though, it seems they have set up a rule on the webserver itself that blocks the IP range of the whole lutn set.