I know there was a lot of finger pointing but in reality the sky didn't fall down. There were about 5000 nodes registering at any one time on the old allstarlink.org servers (now pttlink.org servers). Now there are 5070 nodes on the new allstarlink.org servers. The new allstarlink servers appear to be working great and the sky didn't fall down. https://www.allstarlink.org/nodelist/ On the contrary, there are only 69 nodes registering on the pttlink.org system. I have been watching it and nodes are dropping like flies as remote sites are rebooted and their DNS is updated. https://www.pttlink.org/nodelist/ On the allstarlink stats page, 4797 nodes are reporting to it. http://stats.allstarlink.org On the contrary, there are 14 nodes reporting on the pttlink system. http://stats.pttlink.org I know a few people are commenting on dual registering and I personally don't see the point. When I looked last time, there were only about 10 nodes that were dual registering. Who knows what that could break! I doubt the allstarlink development team is going to be concerned about ensuring that they don't inadvertently make a change on their end that breaks the 10 nodes that are doing something that is unsupported. Plus, I question the stability of the old allstarlink.org system now being called pttlink. In my book, good riddens that it is gone. I remember seeing posts on reddit about a year ago that the system required the servers to set to restart asterisk every 20 or 30 minutes or the system would lock up. It sure doesn't sound like a robust system to me. No wonder they had to have six servers. I am counting my blessings that it never completely went down in the past. Finally, I am starting to see why there was a need for a new system. Even with the very small load, the old system clearly has problems. Look at the pttlink grafana page. None of the numbers add up. This sure explains a lot. This was probably compounded when you had 5000 nodes registering to the old system instead of just 69 nodes. It can't even handle the 69 nodes properly. https://grafana.pttlink.org/d/LpV1-odmz/default?orgId=2 It says there are 126 nodes currently registered. This doesn't match the 69 nodes showing up on their nodes lists. What is this new math? It doesn't even match up the list of nodes on the grafana page. They said they have six nodes: register-cqf.pttlink.org 22 register-cqf.pttlink.org 15 register-mco.pttlink.org 10 register-sea.pttlink.org 11 register-sin.pttlink.org 10 What do I know but according to my math that adds up to: 68 nodes. This number comes close to the node list. Let's stop the bickering and let the old servers die on the vine. Maybe we should have a funeral in the end for them after Covid ends and have a big ham party. The serveres served us all well for the last two years. It is clear now that the Board of Allstarlink tried to not mention Stacy and Bryan by name and take the high road. It is time for the fighting to stop. We should thank Stacy for maintaining the old servers for two year and ask him to remove our data and restore the git hub back to the Alsltarlink board's control. Remember, it was Steve Zingman, one of the original board members who set it up for Allstarlink Inc. Just because Stacy had admin access doesn't mean he should have deleted it and taken control over it. I understand there was bad blood between Stacy/Bryan and the board but they shouldn't take it out on the Ham Community and especially Steve Zingman. Finally, Bryan should return control of the Class C's and ASN's back to the Allstarlink board. He obtained them as a board member on their behalf and once again, just because he had access/power to get control of them, it isn't right for him to keep it. I know many of you are admins and know that just because you have the power to do whatever you want, doesn't mean you should exercise it. Those are my two cents. I hope the healing can begin and we can just have fun being ham radio operators.