Before the Logbook Queue Status page started reporting zero queue size, the 12:56 UTC report today showed an approximate 25% drop in the bytes in the queue from the previous hour. If accurate, that could be great news about reducing the backlog. I uploaded my monthly LoTW TQ8 file (with no dupes) earlier this morning, and it has not been processed, so I suspect the zero queue size reporting is in error. It would be interesting to know if the routine maintenance yesterday included putting the new SSD drives online, or whether they are still in testing and configuration. For those of us who used to wait for months and years for QSL cards, LotW is wonderful, even with 11 day delays! But our electronic world has raised our expectations to "instant" service! Cliff K0CA From: arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of G Widin Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 10:42 AM To: dale.wms1@frontier.com Cc: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Subject: [arrl-odv:21391] Re: LoTW Comes up OK when I log in, although I also observed zeroes in the Queue table. 73, Greg, K0GW On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Dale Williams <dale.wms1@frontier.com> wrote: Does anyone know if part of LOTW has crashed? The Queue reads all zeros. 73, Dale WA8EFK

There’s an update now on the LoTW information page – “Jan 5, 2012: LoTW's log processing is offline. Website access remains open.” Cliff K0CA From: k5ur@aol.com [mailto:k5ur@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 11:10 AM To: cliff.ahrens@gmail.com; gpwidin@comcast.net; dale.wms1@frontier.com Cc: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:21392] Re: LoTW For those of us who used to wait for months and years for QSL cards, LotW is wonderful, even with 11 day delays! But our electronic world has raised our expectations to “instant” service! You got it, Cliff. I remind folks of that all the time. I remember how we waited for those rare Russian cards coming via the bureau, hoping that UH8 and UI8 cards were in the pile. (hi) Opening a bureau shipment became a ceremony! 73, K5UR -----Original Message----- From: Cliff Ahrens <cliff.ahrens@gmail.com> To: 'G Widin' <gpwidin@comcast.net>; dale.wms1 <dale.wms1@frontier.com> Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Sat, Jan 5, 2013 10:56 am Subject: [arrl-odv:21392] Re: LoTW Before the Logbook Queue Status page started reporting zero queue size, the 12:56 UTC report today showed an approximate 25% drop in the bytes in the queue from the previous hour. If accurate, that could be great news about reducing the backlog. I uploaded my monthly LoTW TQ8 file (with no dupes) earlier this morning, and it has not been processed, so I suspect the zero queue size reporting is in error. It would be interesting to know if the routine maintenance yesterday included putting the new SSD drives online, or whether they are still in testing and configuration. For those of us who used to wait for months and years for QSL cards, LotW is wonderful, even with 11 day delays! But our electronic world has raised our expectations to “instant” service! Cliff K0CA From: arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org <mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org?> ] On Behalf Of G Widin Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 10:42 AM To: dale.wms1@frontier.com Cc: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Subject: [arrl-odv:21391] Re: LoTW Comes up OK when I log in, although I also observed zeroes in the Queue table. 73, Greg, K0GW On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Dale Williams <dale.wms1@frontier.com> wrote: Does anyone know if part of LOTW has crashed? The Queue reads all zeros. 73, Dale WA8EFK _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org http://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv

All, Yes, but we NEED everything NOW. Let's just call DXCC Entities on the Land Line (or cell system) and have them fax a confirmation so we can say we "talked" to all entities. I got my bureau cards yesterday and opening the envelope was as exciting (well maybe - I have UH8 and UI8 confirmed)as back in the 60's. But, we need so serve our members and insure that this recent tool does provice almost instant confirmations. 73 Jim K9JF

For those of us who used to wait for months and years for QSL cards, LotW is wonderful, even with 11 day delays! But our electronic world has raised our expectations to “instant” service!

You got it, Cliff. I remind folks of that all the time. I remember how we waited for those rare Russian cards coming via the bureau, hoping that UH8 and UI8 cards were in the pile. (hi) Opening a bureau shipment became a ceremony!

73, K5UR

-----Original Message----- From: Cliff Ahrens <cliff.ahrens@gmail.com> To: 'G Widin' <gpwidin@comcast.net>; dale.wms1 <dale.wms1@frontier.com> Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Sat, Jan 5, 2013 10:56 am Subject: [arrl-odv:21392] Re: LoTW

Before the Logbook Queue Status page started reporting zero queue size, the 12:56 UTC report today showed an approximate 25% drop in the bytes in the queue from the previous hour. If accurate, that could be great news about reducing the backlog.

I uploaded my monthly LoTW TQ8 file (with no dupes) earlier this morning, and it has not been processed, so I suspect the zero queue size reporting is in error. It would be interesting to know if the routine maintenance yesterday included putting the new SSD drives online, or whether they are still in testing and configuration.

For those of us who used to wait for months and years for QSL cards, LotW is wonderful, even with 11 day delays! But our electronic world has raised our expectations to “instant” service!

Cliff K0CA

From: arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of G Widin Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 10:42 AM To: dale.wms1@frontier.com Cc: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Subject: [arrl-odv:21391] Re: LoTW

Comes up OK when I log in, although I also observed zeroes in the Queue table. 73,

Greg, K0GW

On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Dale Williams <dale.wms1@frontier.com> wrote:

Does anyone know if part of LOTW has crashed? The Queue reads all zeros.

73,

Dale WA8EFK

_______________________________________________ rrl-odv mailing list rrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org ttp://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv

_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org http://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv

James E. Fenstermaker K9JF Director, Northwestern Division American Radio Relay League (206) 930-9372

It's important to note that an acknowledgement of receipt involves absolutely no processing, other than confirming receipt was successful at the time of uploading. The acknowledgement should make that clear--no Qs have been checked, just that the file has been successfully received and will be put in the queue. In that regard, and in that regard only, I do think it is fair for LotW users to expect "instantaneous" feedback. -- Agree. Good point, Greg. Communications is so important, especially with us antsy DXers. 73, K5UR -----Original Message----- From: G Widin <gpwidin@comcast.net> To: jfenster <jfenster@pacifier.com> Cc: k5ur <k5ur@aol.com>; cliff.ahrens <cliff.ahrens@gmail.com>; dale.wms1 <dale.wms1@frontier.com>; arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Sat, Jan 5, 2013 12:05 pm Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:21393] Re: LoTW

From a user standpoint, I think the problem is not that the processing isn't instantaneous, the problem is that once you "upload" a log, you have no idea whether it is securely in the queue or not. When processing is virtually instantaneous, that feedback isn't needed. Once there is a lag time, users need to know that their uploaded material has been received and that they needn't upload a "safety" copy. I'm presuming that the folks working on updating the UI on LotW are well aware of this, but perhaps someone can confirm this.

It's important to note that an acknowledgement of receipt involves absolutely no processing, other than confirming receipt was successful at the time of uploading. The acknowledgement should make that clear--no Qs have been checked, just that the file has been successfully received and will be put in the queue. In that regard, and in that regard only, I do think it is fair for LotW users to expect "instantaneous" feedback. -- 73, Greg, K0GW On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 11:54 AM, <jfenster@pacifier.com> wrote: All, Yes, but we NEED everything NOW. Let's just call DXCC Entities on the Land Line (or cell system) and have them fax a confirmation so we can say we "talked" to all entities. I got my bureau cards yesterday and opening the envelope was as exciting (well maybe - I have UH8 and UI8 confirmed)as back in the 60's. But, we need so serve our members and insure that this recent tool does provice almost instant confirmations. 73 Jim K9JF

For those of us who used to wait for months and years for QSL cards, LotW is wonderful, even with 11 day delays! But our electronic world has raised our expectations to “instant” service!

You got it, Cliff. I remind folks of that all the time. I remember how we waited for those rare Russian cards coming via the bureau, hoping that UH8 and UI8 cards were in the pile. (hi) Opening a bureau shipment became a ceremony!

73, K5UR

-----Original Message----- From: Cliff Ahrens <cliff.ahrens@gmail.com> To: 'G Widin' <gpwidin@comcast.net>; dale.wms1 <dale.wms1@frontier.com> Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Sat, Jan 5, 2013 10:56 am Subject: [arrl-odv:21392] Re: LoTW

Before the Logbook Queue Status page started reporting zero queue size, the 12:56 UTC report today showed an approximate 25% drop in the bytes in the queue from the previous hour. If accurate, that could be great news about reducing the backlog.

I uploaded my monthly LoTW TQ8 file (with no dupes) earlier this morning, and it has not been processed, so I suspect the zero queue size reporting is in error. It would be interesting to know if the routine maintenance yesterday included putting the new SSD drives online, or whether they are still in testing and configuration.

For those of us who used to wait for months and years for QSL cards, LotW is wonderful, even with 11 day delays! But our electronic world has raised our expectations to “instant” service!

Cliff K0CA

From: arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of G Widin Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 10:42 AM To: dale.wms1@frontier.com Cc: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Subject: [arrl-odv:21391] Re: LoTW

Comes up OK when I log in, although I also observed zeroes in the Queue table. 73,

Greg, K0GW

On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Dale Williams <dale.wms1@frontier.com> wrote:

Does anyone know if part of LOTW has crashed? The Queue reads all zeros.

73,

Dale WA8EFK

_______________________________________________ rrl-odv mailing list rrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org ttp://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv

_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org http://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv

James E. Fenstermaker K9JF Director, Northwestern Division American Radio Relay League (206) 930-9372

I agree that a user should be entitled to know if the log was successfully uploaded and in the queue. LoTW does that - it acknowledge receipt of the log and that it is queued for processing. It doesn't allow you to confirm that your log is still pending in the queue. That wasn't a problem until the bug causing logs to be lost was discovered. Thankfully, through K1MK's skillful detective work, that bug was fixed. The Logbook Queue Status hourly reports on the Web do show the date and time of logs that LoTW is currently processing. And LotW does confirm in "Your Activity" when your log is processed. From those reports, a user can easily tell how close his or her log is to being processed. And if the Queue Status shows a logs being processed date that is later than the user's upload, and the user doesn't have a confirmation that his log was processed in "Your Activity" then it is apparent there must have been a problem. It seems to me that LoTW provides the same information to users as DXCC does to those who submit paper logs. On paper submissions, the Web page shows the user's call sign when the log was received and shows the date on which logs received are currently being processed. If there is a way that the C++ programmers who are helping the IT folks can give more information about the status of uploads as still pending in the queue for processing, that would be great. But I do think that the recent additions of more information about the queue status enables a user to know whether the log should have been processed and thus determine whether there is a problem. Cliff K0CA From: gpwidin1@gmail.com [mailto:gpwidin1@gmail.com] On Behalf Of G Widin Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 12:05 PM To: jfenster@pacifier.com Cc: k5ur@aol.com; cliff.ahrens@gmail.com; dale.wms1@frontier.com; arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:21393] Re: LoTW

From a user standpoint, I think the problem is not that the processing isn't instantaneous, the problem is that once you "upload" a log, you have no idea whether it is securely in the queue or not. When processing is virtually instantaneous, that feedback isn't needed. Once there is a lag time, users need to know that their uploaded material has been received and that they needn't upload a "safety" copy. I'm presuming that the folks working on updating the UI on LotW are well aware of this, but perhaps someone can confirm this.

It's important to note that an acknowledgement of receipt involves absolutely no processing, other than confirming receipt was successful at the time of uploading. The acknowledgement should make that clear--no Qs have been checked, just that the file has been successfully received and will be put in the queue. In that regard, and in that regard only, I do think it is fair for LotW users to expect "instantaneous" feedback. -- 73, Greg, K0GW