On demand download failure Sky+ on 2 boxes

[Annie+UK]

---

@Steve0001 wrote:

The problem I have with some of the responses on this thread is that they come from accounts labelled 'Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee'. To be clear, a lot of their responses are helpful and this is not me having a go at them as they are clearly trying to help. However, the 'find out more' link indicates that the superusers have to sign a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA) to become 'superusers'.

https://helpforum.sky.com/t5/Superusers/bd-p/meetthesuperusers

That is normally something reserved for employees or possibly individuals that aspire to be employees. It means that the Superusers can be prosecuted if they break the NDA terms. Why would non-Sky employee forum helpers have access to NDA material that would require them to sign NDA agreements?

@Chloe-W22can't you give us some proper feedback? There are clearly tech savvy people on this thread that are trying to work things out and they deserve a response from Sky tech.

I don't need the SkyQ nudge. Please be honest about the Sky+ service. If you want to turn it off then let us all know and give us deadlines.

---

We have to sign an NDA because we get upfront information that Sky does not want in the public domain early, also we trial new hardware and beta software, nice try with the conspircy theory but many companies make members of the public sign NDAs

Sky would not prosecute any of us, they would just remove your privilages and take you out of the superuser group

[Mark39]

---

@Steve0001 wrote:

Why would non-Sky employee forum helpers have access to NDA material that would require them to sign NDA agreements?

---

Simply because we have direct access to Sky personnel who may speak candidly about matters we contact them about, or future developments. I doubt that there's any Superuser who aspires to be a member of Sky staff.

Sky rarely provide information about development work. They'll shout if they need further help. No deadline for ending support for Sky+ boxes has been announced. I've no idea if it has been considered behind the scenes.

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Steve0001 wrote:

Why would non-Sky employee forum helpers have access to NDA material that would require them to sign NDA agreements?

---

Sometimes we get information ahead of wider release: that's about it for anything which might be NDA'd.

'Prosecuted' is a bit strong: we might lose our precious badges though.

[Steve0001]

---

@Annie+UK wrote:

---

@Steve0001 wrote:

The problem I have with some of the responses on this thread is that they come from accounts labelled 'Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee'. To be clear, a lot of their responses are helpful and this is not me having a go at them as they are clearly trying to help. However, the 'find out more' link indicates that the superusers have to sign a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA) to become 'superusers'.

https://helpforum.sky.com/t5/Superusers/bd-p/meetthesuperusers

That is normally something reserved for employees or possibly individuals that aspire to be employees. It means that the Superusers can be prosecuted if they break the NDA terms. Why would non-Sky employee forum helpers have access to NDA material that would require them to sign NDA agreements?

@Chloe-W22can't you give us some proper feedback? There are clearly tech savvy people on this thread that are trying to work things out and they deserve a response from Sky tech.

I don't need the SkyQ nudge. Please be honest about the Sky+ service. If you want to turn it off then let us all know and give us deadlines.

---

We have to sign an NDA because we get upfront information that Sky does not want in the public domain early, also we trial new hardware and beta software, nice try with the conspircy theory but many companies make members of the public sign NDAs

Sky would not prosecute any of us, they would just remove your privilages and take you out of the superuser group

---

Thank you @Annie+UK

I am not a conspiracy person, just a Sky customer paying £1200+ per year for a service that I am not fully receiving.

[TheRealFixer]

I completely agree @Steve0001. This has gone on too long. @MogwaiSatTV has been trying to feedback with no apparent response. It will probably be DNS as I mentioned many posts ago. I still have the bubble open if I can help but since Sky having put up my subscription and offering extended care on the box that isn't working as it did...?  Really?

Phil.

SysAdmin (not Sky)

All own selected AV equipment

Subscriptions - my own business 

[Mark39]

---

@TheRealFixer wrote:

MogwaiSatTV has been trying to feedback with no apparent response. 

---

To be fair, I don't think Sky requested any assistance of that kind.

[MogwaiSatTV]

They did reach out to me as I metioned wireshark much earlier in the thread. I have messaged them the details I posted yesterday. So hopefully that will lead to a resolution.

[pkjp]

@TimmyBGood Yes but, if it is a DNS issue, it very much is within Sky's control to keep any DNS servers up to date with the correct information to allow these IP addresses to resolve properly.

[Annie+UK]

---

@pkjp wrote:

@TimmyBGood Yes but, if it is a DNS issue, it very much is within Sky's control to keep any DNS servers up to date with the correct information to allow these IP addresses to resolve properly.

---

????????????? That's not how DNS servers work

[TimmyBGood]

@pkjp 

Their DNS servers, yes, but the very nature of DNS means no-one has 'control' over anyone else's DNS infrastructure.

[pkjp]

@Mark39 Regardless of how many customers are affected, they are all still paying the full Sky subscription and therefore should expect full and competent Sky support. If Sky wish to deprecate the  Sky+HD service then they should simply just say and provide a specific date for end of life. I actually doubt Sky are trying to move customers to other services in such a clumsy manner and would hope it's instead just clumsiness on the part of the network/server team responsible for these particular servers.

[Mark39]

---

@pkjp wrote:

@Mark39 Regardless of how many customers are affected, they are all still paying the full Sky subscription...

---

Have you spoken to Sky about partial reimbursment?

[pkjp]

@TimmyBGood No-one's talking about needing control of any DNS but rather simply updating relevant records on a DNS and then letting it cascade to the others. 

[Annie+UK]

---

@Mark39 wrote:

---

@pkjp wrote:

@Mark39 Regardless of how many customers are affected, they are all still paying the full Sky subscription...

---

Have you spoken to Sky about partial reimbursment?

---

I doubt anyone would get one as Sky have always claim that On Demand is a FREE service and not part of your subscription 😞

[Tony+Whewell]

That's strange as the new service sky stream relies totally on on demand downloads and that costs £26 per month ...