Broken link(s?)
- Link(s) in the docs is (are?) broken.
E.g: Page https://docs.iotcreators.com/docs/sim-cards has a link leading to https://forum.iot.t-mobile.nl/ (which has no valid SSL)
(as in âwho is General Failure and why is he reading my drive?â)
The portal is still not functional. Everybody sleeping?
Time for ď¸ + and getting the kids to school. Thanks to everybody for making this second time around a success!
Letâs keep it at an anomaly.
happy to say I see multiple devices getting their message across.
Howâs the system holding up?
After another try, the device message did get through. Could this be the issue in which the first message by CoAp is seen as registration and then discarded before the message actually gets through?
No, itâs a device that sends an uplink after a human triggered it on location.
@Florian-Duecker said in IoT Creators Upgrade 26/05/2021 [STATUS UPDATES]:
also
Good morning. Great to read that the migration is completed successfully. I run into some issues:
Thank you for looking into these issues.
@Cees-Meijer might have fallen prey to the Catch-All-Tenant
Havenât tried this yet but might it have to do with the newline character after the serialNumber
?
It is up again since around 14:10
Thanks for the quick response
Hi,
All projects in the portal give error messages, not being able to load devices.
Either the platform is down or our account seems suspended.
API only returns errors.
On first call I got something like âLicense expiredâ (did not copy it)
Now itâs saying things like:
"code": "FORBIDDEN",
"localizedMessage": "JBAS014502: Invocation on method: public com.alu.mdm.rest.Page com.alu.mdm.rest.device.DeviceResource.query(javax.ws.rs.core.UriInfo) of bean: DeviceResource is not allowed"
or
{
"msg": "Unauthorized group",
"code": 1006
}
Does this mean that we were the only one who received the âweâre rescheduling the upgradeâ email from @Roland-Baldin-as-Admin ?
So then I am the infamous one-star-rating-customerâŚ
Ok. I understand your reasons for choosing office hours.
But please do take to heart for next time to not send out conflicting messages:
@afzal_m explained on 28/4 12:34 that office hours were the better choice
but hours later @Roland-Baldin-as-Admin sent us an email in which he said you were finding another time outside office hours.
Nothing after that.
So we were expecting another announcement and we had no reason to notify our customers.
Shock and awe when we started receiving complaints and received the update-email almost an hour after the end of the initial time frame stating you were trying to fix the resulting problems.
So, Iâm happy @Cees-Meijer, that you feel you were updated during the process but I definitely do not feel we were kept in the loop.
And of course: âShit happens!â
But to describe the process as ânot as smooth as we all have wished forâ does not really seem accurate to me.
I guess Iâm not the only one whoâs very unhappy with how all this went down.
Weâre receiving complaint after complaint.
Hope this will mean you will never again do a major update during office hours.
Not to say âI told you soâ but I told you so.
Hey @afzal_m,
Thanks for explaining. This helps.
Please consider making this a protocol when sending out emails about service interruptions (planned or not).
And please let us know what will happen with the sent data: Will devices need to send it again or will it arrive at our application after the update was successful?
Once we know this, we can tell our customers what to expect and how to act on degraded functionality,
@Roalnd-Baldin
We just received an email that you are planning to interrupt the service on 11-5 between 9AM - 11AM.
Please elaborate why you planned this during office hours? We have hundreds of primary school teachers counting on our service.
Why did you decide such a non-standard time frame to push a planned update?
We all know that âa few minutesâ because of an update, especially with âexciting new featuresâ can turn into a lot longer.
Iâm worried about our customers not getting the âregularâ service.
Please reconsider the time frame so we are free to party about the âexciting new featuresâ.
Looking at the Roaming Network Info it looks like national collegial roaming is offered.
Is this conclusion correct? Does âroamingâ also imply being able to use other collegial national networks when the âpreferred supplierâ is not available?
Is it possible to recover which operator transferred the message to the platform?
I have non-development hardware which works across the border in Germany but Iâd like to verify which operator handled it.
IMEI: 358878080087361
This what you looking for? (pseudo)
AT+CGDCONT=1,"IP","cdp.iot.t-mobile.nl"
AT+NCDP="172.27.131.100"
AT+NSMI=0
AT+NNMI=0
AT+CFUN=1
AT+NBAND=8
AT+COPS=1,2,"20416"
// Check for CSQ:
AT+CSQ
// until lower than 99.99
// Then wait for attach:
AT+CGATT
// until 1
// Then send message:
AT+NMGS=<message-size>,"<message>"
// And read response to check for OK