[Yzf600rmb]

I think this is a tower thing I live in phx az and I am leaving town today for Vegas all the time that we have been driving I havE had EDGE. AND AM POSTING THIS FROM NY STROM 2 9550 ?!???!?!?!?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Are you on T-Mobile???

[Black Ice]

When you guys find an attorney post his/her link up so we can all sign on. I think this is turning into a pandemic.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[mrsblount06]

I am in las Vegas right now with EDGE AND POSTING THIS FROM MY BLACKBERRY STORM 2 9550

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[GYGZACH]

I am in las Vegas right now with EDGE AND POSTING THIS FROM MY BLACKBERRY STORM 2 9550

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Are you by chance connected to wifi?

[Branta]

What is this "AT&T settlement" that everyone is talking about?

A conspiracy theory which has zero relevance in what is almost certainly a technical issue. It is highly unlikely that RIM would risk the commercial suicide of deliberately blocking phones owned by customers, as suggested by this theory.

AT&T got their butts kicked for refusing to provide SIM unlock codes, and keeping phones locked to network even when the phone was out of contract and fully owned by the customer. The crazies are suggesting that RIM is testing alternate methods of preventing unlocked phones being used on other networks to defeat the settled case.

[Ahbood]

I have been on the phone with RIm for the past few days working on the problem. Rim has assured me it is a T-mobile problem and on theirs.. T_Mobile has told me that they have an outage and do not kno whow or when they will have it repaired.. I have two Storms that dont work and one of them will not even register on the system. It says "your are trying to to use an unspecified device" until then I have to revert back to my pearl.. Ughhhhh

[xandermac]

I'll accept your apology when it turns out that I'm right. In the mean time, moderator or not, contribute and leave the insults out of it. I know you're a rim fan but that doesn't mean they're not doing this and if youre unable to explain it my theory still stands. Trust me, a technical issue doesn't take 2 weeks to resolve.

A conspiracy theory which has zero relevance in what is almost certainly a technical issue. It is highly unlikely that RIM would risk the commercial suicide of deliberately blocking phones owned by customers, as suggested by this theory.

AT&T got their butts kicked for refusing to provide SIM unlock codes, and keeping phones locked to network even when the phone was out of contract and fully owned by the customer. The crazies are suggesting that RIM is testing alternate methods of preventing unlocked phones being used on other networks to defeat the settled case.

[TheBigBadClown]

I'll accept your apology when it turns out that I'm right. In the mean time, moderator or not, contribute and leave the insults out of it. I know you're a rim fan but that doesn't mean they're not doing this and if youre unable to explain it my theory still stands. Trust me, a technical issue doesn't take 2 weeks to resolve.

I'm with Branta on this one! You are one of the crazies creating undo hysteria on this issue! It would be legal suicide for Rim or Verizon to participate in such actions! As far as T-Mobile is concerned they have way to much to lose to ever contemplate such shady business practices!

[TheBigBadClown]

Also I believe we have seen more posts with peeps talking to tmo and tmo saying they are taking responsibility for this being a network outage than any posts saying Rim or vzn are blocking the phones!

[BBHack]

I have unlocked Storm 2 9550 from VZW now on Tmobile. Left for Las Vegas from Peoria AZ yesterday. Had edge...somwhere around Wikieup I got EDGE and phoned registered with RIM when it was roaming. Service books, HRT was empty now has info from Tmobile. Got emails, etc. Then EDGE went to edge for rest of trip to Las Vegas. Got to Las Vegas....edge. Driving back to Peoria AZ and phone got EDGE when roaming so I hit Register Now under HRT for S**s and giggles and it stayed EDGE roaming and on Tmobile. In Peoria AZ now and have EDGE. So it must be a tower thing as RIM recognized the phone as soon as it jumped off Tmobile and roamed yesterday and now today it has been on EDGE for several hours. Anyone else getting EDGE back?

[gasolara2002]

I have unlocked Storm 2 9550 from VZW now on Tmobile. Left for Las Vegas from Peoria AZ yesterday. Had edge...somwhere around Wikieup I got EDGE and phoned registered with RIM when it was roaming. Service books, HRT was empty now has info from Tmobile. Got emails, etc. Then EDGE went to edge for rest of trip to Las Vegas. Got to Las Vegas....edge. Driving back to Peoria AZ and phone got EDGE when roaming so I hit Register Now under HRT for S**s and giggles and it stayed EDGE roaming and on Tmobile. In Peoria AZ now and have EDGE. So it must be a tower thing as RIM recognized the phone as soon as it jumped off Tmobile and roamed yesterday and now today it has been on EDGE for several hours. Anyone else getting EDGE back?

O wow!! I'm going to try that tommorrow!!! I know i can roam on AT&T not to far from here. Nice tip!

[gasolara2002]

O yea for the argument that is happening it is t-mobile's network. They are upgrading the bis/bes software within their network. So t-mobile is at fault but it is only because of the network upgrades they are doing. I called a friend who works in the corporate office. Its confirmed in my book. RIM is not at fault.

[BBHack]

Okay now my EDGE has dropped to edge. My phone locked up and It rebooted and when it came back I could not use the browser. Checked settings and it said hotspot where before it was set to internet browser. The web2go browser is also missing and I had that in Las Vegas. Cannot use bb messenger and phone will not stay on EDGE now it just goes to edge each time. Something on Tmobile side (towers?) is causing this.

[imashaya2001]

I have unlocked Storm 2 9550 from VZW now on Tmobile. Left for Las Vegas from Peoria AZ yesterday. Had edge...somwhere around Wikieup I got EDGE and phoned registered with RIM when it was roaming. Service books, HRT was empty now has info from Tmobile. Got emails, etc. Then EDGE went to edge for rest of trip to Las Vegas. Got to Las Vegas....edge. Driving back to Peoria AZ and phone got EDGE when roaming so I hit Register Now under HRT for S**s and giggles and it stayed EDGE roaming and on Tmobile. In Peoria AZ now and have EDGE. So it must be a tower thing as RIM recognized the phone as soon as it jumped off Tmobile and roamed yesterday and now today it has been on EDGE for several hours. Anyone else getting EDGE back?

what happened to you is the exact same thing that happened to me while I went to Mexico and was roaming on Telcel and Movistar...I shared that in this threat in earlier posts...since I'm back in the US my EDGE went back to edge

[crackfinder]

I have been on the fence in regards to who is at blame here. At first I thought it was T-Mobile, then RIM, Verizon, and back to RIM and so on. There has been a lot of speculation in this forum and I have to admit that I am guilty of it myself. We are trying to troubleshoot with the information that we have and figure this out through process of elimination.

With that said, I spent some time with various Android phones at both T-Mobile and Verizon. Although the Android OS does seem impressive and I have always been impressed by HTC, there is just something about a BB that keeps drawing me back. Since I am an engineer by profession, I always try to keep an open mind and stay unbiased. I played with the Androids and just can't used to them. Maybe if I actually bought one and owned one it would be different, but there is just something about BB that keeps me for now. I don't know...maybe its just its simplicity. Some of these other user interfaces just don't seem as user friendly and unorganized. I don't know. Maybe its just me. I hope that when OS6 comes out, that it doesn't ruin the BlackBerry experience. Just some thoughts. I am still going back today to spend a little more time with Androids.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[xandermac]

Android is okay. I'm enjoying my mt3gs but a bb with berrybuzz and berrypopup is still my ideal device. It's just remarkably difficult to justify that this isn't rim doing this when I have Verizon servicebooks pushed to my storm. Why and how would T-Mobile push Verizon servicebooks?

I have been on the fence in regards to who is at blame here. At first I thought it was T-Mobile, then RIM, Verizon, and back to RIM and so on. There has been a lot of speculation in this forum and I have to admit that I am guilty of it myself. We are trying to troubleshoot with the information that we have and figure this out through process of elimination.

With that said, I spent some time with various Android phones at both T-Mobile and Verizon. Although the Android OS does seem impressive and I have always been impressed by HTC, there is just something about a BB that keeps drawing me back. Since I am an engineer by profession, I always try to keep an open mind and stay unbiased. I played with the Androids and just can't used to them. Maybe if I actually bought one and owned one it would be different, but there is just something about BB that keeps me for now. I don't know...maybe its just its simplicity. Some of these other user interfaces just don't seem as user friendly and unorganized. I don't know. Maybe its just me. I hope that when OS6 comes out, that it doesn't ruin the BlackBerry experience. Just some thoughts. I am still going back today to spend a little more time with Androids.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Branta]

Android is okay. I'm enjoying my mt3gs but a bb with berrybuzz and berrypopup is still my ideal device. It's just remarkably difficult to justify that this isn't rim doing this when I have Verizon servicebooks pushed to my storm. Why and how would T-Mobile push Verizon servicebooks?

It may not have been knowingly pushed by RIM or T-Mobile. Remember your Storm started life as a Verizon device. It was issued to Verizon, PIN and ESN/IMEI were recorded in the Verizon and RIM databases as a Verizon device, it still has a Verizon Vendor_ID, still uses software built for Verizon devices, and still has a CDMA radio which, like it or not, can still see Verizon towers even if it is not permitted to make billable access. It is plausible that new Verizon settings were pushed by Verizon directly, or by RIM on Verizon's request to all known Verizon devices, and nobody anticipated that they were going to hit phones which were now permanently used on other networks.

It is equally plausible that the outage may be caused by human error or an unplanned side effect of legitimate maintenance at RIM or T-Mobile. However it is inconceivable that it would be planned by either RIM or T-Mobile to disconnect a group of customers without notice, but keep taking the money and risk the anger of regulatory authorities and the courts when the intent was proved.

[xandermac]

That's true. Regardless of the source it would be nice to see it fixed. Two weeks is ridiculous for a technical glitch. I'm fortunate that I can buy any device, some people are stuck with the one that isn't working and it stinks for them.

like it or not, can still see Verizon towers even if it is not permitted to make billable access. It is plausible that new Verizon settings were pushed by Verizon directly, or by RIM on Verizon's request to all known Verizon devices, and nobody anticipated that they were going to hit phones which were now permanently used on other

[Branta]

I have been on the fence in regards to who is at blame here. At first I thought it was T-Mobile, then RIM, Verizon, and back to RIM and so on. There has been a lot of speculation in this forum and I have to admit that I am guilty of it myself. We are trying to troubleshoot with the information that we have and figure this out through process of elimination.

I have tried to make the same analysis from the technical side, using knowledge of how the system works and the factual information presented in these threads. The best approach is to leave blame out of it and concentrate on "how" - the places the technology can break, either deliberately or by accident.

Considering ONLY the ex-Verizon devices the evidence so far provides the following facts:
The outage appears to hit ex-Verizon dual mode (CDMA/GSM) devices migrated to other networks. The majority of reports are from users on T-Mo/US, and a few from users on other overseas networks.

Voice and SMS work normally. Only BB data is lost.

The outage hits users on their "home" network. Normal function is restored when the device roams away from the home network (2 or 3 positive reports, none against).

The majority of reports indicate the APN is set to a Verizon-owned APN.

Analysis -
Successful voice operation proves beyond doubt that the devices have not been barred for commercial reasons (bad debt).

The reports of successful data operation while roaming away from home network prove that the devices are capable of correct operation (not broken). Service authorisation is checked back to the home network when a device registers with a new roaming network. This proves that the home network has not blocked data service to the device. Roaming success also proves that the device is "allowed" on the RIM network and does not have a blocked PIN.

Conclusions -
This tends to suggest a network failure somewhere between the home network and full access to the RIM NOC. It appears there are two possible areas of failure:
(1) Network between mobile device and "home" service provider's systems.
(2) Routing between "home" provider and RIM NOC.

(1) seems less unlikely because it would require specific action by the home network to block certain phones. Considering the reports from users on overseas networks, it is unlikely the same blockage against ex-Verizon devices would be implemented in Switzerland, India, and Indonesia at more or less the same time it was implemented in USA.

(2) seems more likely because it contains the points of failure which could bite regardless of home network. Possible points of failure to consider would be the exit/entry at each of home network, RIM NOC, and any intermediates

One possible key indicator here is the commonly reported vzw3g APN. This suggests the likely path between device and RIM may be defaulted to pass through Verizon's network. T-Mobile/US and Verizon are commercial competitors in the same geographic market and do not have a roaming agreement.

Hypothesis -
The attempted data path respects the vzw3g.com APN and attempts to access RIM NOC via the Verizon network, but it is blocked by a "firewall" or other authentication process.

There is no evidence whether this could be due to a new APN pushed to the phones which was blocked by an existing firewall, -or- a new firewall rule implemented somewhere in the network path between the home provider's NOC, Verizon's network and RIM NOC, to block data which may have previously been allowed to pass unhindered. However, the reports from overseas providers suggests it is more likely to occur at a single point in the shared part of the routing rather than multiple implementations of a similar blockage. That tends to point at either RIM or a common downstream conduit, where Verizon's network is suggested as the most likely common player.

It is certain that any cellular network can identify data passing in transit rather than data intended for phones currently supported and active on its radio towers. Transit data for non-customers would be considered as parasitic, and there would be a commercial motivation to block it. There would be no obligation to give any warning before implementing a block, nor to make any statement or respond to questions about such an action.

If a firewall-type block was to be implemented by one provider it would have to be selective against other cellular providers which do not have a roaming agreement. It appears the failures reported so far are consistent with this requirement.

RIM has no commercial reason to block data to certain phones which are legitimately connected by its cellular network customers. RIM doesn't care which provider connects a phone from one week to the next, RIM gets paid and carries the same volume of data regardless of which cellular provider is hosting the phone. All RIM wants to see is more BlackBerry devices connected and active. The availability of service while roaming on other providers (with RIM as common provider) also suggests the blockage is not implemented at RIM's network.

The home cellular network (T-Mobile for most victims) has no motivation to deliberately block phones because of their original source, nor is there a commercial benefit from such action. In fact it would create a cost to implement it and is more likely to result in commercial harm and regulatory sanctions against any provider taking such action in respect of phones used by currently active customers. It is unlikely that blocking action would be confined to BB data, and voice service wuld be a better target. Any such block would also impact the targetted phones while roaming, so it can be immediately discounted.

Note - there is no reason to think this is the only possible explanation but it seems to be the most likely on technical grounds from the reports so far. More information may change my opinion from minute to minute - I will be happy to discuss with open minded users and try to help the community get to the bottom of this problem.

[Branta]

That's true. Regardless of the source it would be nice to see it fixed. Two weeks is ridiculous for a technical glitch. I'm fortunate that I can buy any device, some people are stuck with the one that isn't working and it stinks for them.

like it or not, can still see Verizon towers even if it is not permitted to make billable access. It is plausible that new Verizon settings were pushed by Verizon directly, or by RIM on Verizon's request to all known Verizon devices, and nobody anticipated that they were going to hit phones which were now permanently used on other

Second thoughts... stand down direct tower push. There are some reports from non-US users where they would not be able to see the VZ towers.

However, I can imagine a scenario where data was channelled through VZ APNs regardless of settings on the device (maybe an OS bug or "design feature") and Verizon turned off the tap, or where new settings were pushed to all known Verizon PINs without checking they were still valid on the VZ network. Either of these possibilities could be extremely difficult to troubleshoot because no single individual would be able to see the whole picture.

[Branta]

O yea for the argument that is happening it is t-mobile's network. They are upgrading the bis/bes software within their network. So t-mobile is at fault but it is only because of the network upgrades they are doing. I called a friend who works in the corporate office. Its confirmed in my book. RIM is not at fault.

ISTM the software upgrade theory doesn't stand up on several counts.
1. There is a bad consequence for many users, and immediately visible to justify a rollback while the issue is resolved. It doesn't take 2 weeks of angry customers and rebated charges to trigger the reversion to earlier software.
2. Software upgrade would also hit roaming users, but reports suggest success while roaming.
3. There are similar reports from non-TMo customers outside USA.

[gasolara2002]

Great answer!!!

I have tried to make the same analysis from the technical side, using knowledge of how the system works and the factual information presented in these threads. The best approach is to leave blame out of it and concentrate on "how" - the places the technology can break, either deliberately or by accident.

Considering ONLY the ex-Verizon devices the evidence so far provides the following facts:
The outage appears to hit ex-Verizon dual mode (CDMA/GSM) devices migrated to other networks. The majority of reports are from users on T-Mo/US, and a few from users on other overseas networks.

Voice and SMS work normally. Only BB data is lost.

The outage hits users on their "home" network. Normal function is restored when the device roams away from the home network (2 or 3 positive reports, none against).

The majority of reports indicate the APN is set to a Verizon-owned APN.

Analysis -
Successful voice operation proves beyond doubt that the devices have not been barred for commercial reasons (bad debt).

The reports of successful data operation while roaming away from home network prove that the devices are capable of correct operation (not broken). Service authorisation is checked back to the home network when a device registers with a new roaming network. This proves that the home network has not blocked data service to the device. Roaming success also proves that the device is "allowed" on the RIM network and does not have a blocked PIN.

Conclusions -
This tends to suggest a network failure somewhere between the home network and full access to the RIM NOC. It appears there are two possible areas of failure:
(1) Network between mobile device and "home" service provider's systems.
(2) Routing between "home" provider and RIM NOC.

(1) seems less unlikely because it would require specific action by the home network to block certain phones. Considering the reports from users on overseas networks, it is unlikely the same blockage against ex-Verizon devices would be implemented in Switzerland, India, and Indonesia at more or less the same time it was implemented in USA.

(2) seems more likely because it contains the points of failure which could bite regardless of home network. Possible points of failure to consider would be the exit/entry at each of home network, RIM NOC, and any intermediates

One possible key indicator here is the commonly reported vzw3g APN. This suggests the likely path between device and RIM may be defaulted to pass through Verizon's network. T-Mobile/US and Verizon are commercial competitors in the same geographic market and do not have a roaming agreement.

Hypothesis -
The attempted data path respects the vzw3g.com APN and attempts to access RIM NOC via the Verizon network, but it is blocked by a "firewall" or other authentication process.

There is no evidence whether this could be due to a new APN pushed to the phones which was blocked by an existing firewall, -or- a new firewall rule implemented somewhere in the network path between the home provider's NOC, Verizon's network and RIM NOC, to block data which may have previously been allowed to pass unhindered. However, the reports from overseas providers suggests it is more likely to occur at a single point in the shared part of the routing rather than multiple implementations of a similar blockage. That tends to point at either RIM or a common downstream conduit, where Verizon's network is suggested as the most likely common player.

It is certain that any cellular network can identify data passing in transit rather than data intended for phones currently supported and active on its radio towers. Transit data for non-customers would be considered as parasitic, and there would be a commercial motivation to block it. There would be no obligation to give any warning before implementing a block, nor to make any statement or respond to questions about such an action.

If a firewall-type block was to be implemented by one provider it would have to be selective against other cellular providers which do not have a roaming agreement. It appears the failures reported so far are consistent with this requirement.

RIM has no commercial reason to block data to certain phones which are legitimately connected by its cellular network customers. RIM doesn't care which provider connects a phone from one week to the next, RIM gets paid and carries the same volume of data regardless of which cellular provider is hosting the phone. All RIM wants to see is more BlackBerry devices connected and active. The availability of service while roaming on other providers (with RIM as common provider) also suggests the blockage is not implemented at RIM's network.

The home cellular network (T-Mobile for most victims) has no motivation to deliberately block phones because of their original source, nor is there a commercial benefit from such action. In fact it would create a cost to implement it and is more likely to result in commercial harm and regulatory sanctions against any provider taking such action in respect of phones used by currently active customers. It is unlikely that blocking action would be confined to BB data, and voice service wuld be a better target. Any such block would also impact the targetted phones while roaming, so it can be immediately discounted.

Note - there is no reason to think this is the only possible explanation but it seems to be the most likely on technical grounds from the reports so far. More information may change my opinion from minute to minute - I will be happy to discuss with open minded users and try to help the community get to the bottom of this problem.

[Branta]

Great answer!!!

The question - and it is potentially a $million dollar one in the real sense - is "Is the hypothesis correct"? That's why I throw it up for debate and review.

Now some logic applied to some of the other theories advanced.

Deliberate blocking action by RIM or T-Mobile at network level:
Unlikely, because it would require "effort" to approve and implement. That means cost (salary hours) for zero direct financial benefit. Even indirect financial benefit (selling new devices) would be a high risk strategy, with relatively few sales and a probability that a proportion of impacted users would take their business elsewhere and consequent loss of long term revenue. There is also a risk that the strategy could be discovered with adverse publicity, regulatory response, and severe damage to reputation of the responsible corporation. With the risk of financial penalties it is not plausible that the management board would approve such a scheme.

Deliberate sabotage of devices by Verizon or RIM (original supplier):
It is probably feasible at a technical level for a network operator to push "disruptive" settings to a phone for which they were original supplier. It is extremely unlikley at a commercial level because it would have an associated cost to implement, for zero gain - overall loss. From a legal perspective such an action could be shown as illegally damaging the property of individual customers, or illegal access to a computer device. Both would be liable to criminal response, and compensation to impacted users. It is inconcievable that a reputable corporation would even consider such a malicious action.

Blocking within the T-Mobile network (packet level):
This should present the same appearance as any other firewall-type block - it is within the scope of observed impacts. However, it would require the ability to discriminate connection requests from specific models of device, and there is no reason to believe this would be accessible. There is no reason that network hardware would be configured to examine this parameter for connections which originated within the cellular network - deemed pre-authorised by account (SIM) permissions so difficult to implement.

Blocking within the T-Mobile network (permissions level):
Difficult to implement by device source. User permissions are derived through SIM lookup without reference to device identity. Probably (almost certainly) ruled out because roaming verification is looked up in the same database when the roaming network requests approval and the home network responds by accepting billing.

Unauthorised blocking within the T-Mobile or RIM network
Ruled out as Blocking above, PLUS: it would require a malicious individual from a small group who are able to access and manipulate key points of the transit through the network or the authentication system. the classic case would be a revenge strike by a single user who was subject to discipline or termination. The combined probability of one individual existing, with opportunity, with the motivation and ability to select a small group of "ex-Verizon devices", seems vanishingly small.

Accidental blocking within the T-Mobile network:
Plausible, but "somebody" would have to do something to cause it, and it seems unlikely the resulting outcry would not cause it to be found and corrected. It is likely this would have been found within a few days.

[gasolara2002]

Ok I honestly have a handful questions. I'm kind of through with the cause. I rather have an alternative because in all realness the storm2 has a better signal strength than my bold 9700. I have tested this in rural areas and in metropolitan areas. Will a vodaphone storm 2 work with t-mobile then in this situation? Is verizon the only branded blackberries not working with t-mobile? Does anyone know if an unbranded blackberry will work with t-mobile due to the current situation?

[Black Ice]

What do you guys mean by Ex Verizion phones?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com