Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert
You made several assumptions that just aren't correct. First of all the issue has to be identified then validated with the impacted vendor(s). Remember this isn't impacting other 3rd party vendors just Tivo. Once an issue has been validated with xyz product MSO's are totally reliant on the MFR to fix their product (which in this case was Cisco). Cisco then fixes whatever the issue may be and releases the fix to the impacted MSO's.
From there the fix has to be validated in our labs to make sure that (1) it actually solves the problem (2) won't introduce new possibly worse issues (3) won't negatively impact our systems, operations and other customers. TWC like us has a process by which we follow for this and there's reason why things take as long as they do. Lots of things need to be tested and this isn't the only thing we're working on right now..lots of fish to fry.
For what its worth this issue was fasttracked but there is a limit to which no MSO will cross when it comes to validations. We and I'm sure TWC will not release something until we're comfortable that this is going to be a minimal impact upgrade.
The better solution to this is the next time Tivo identifies a problem they come to me to directly (not through their customers) and I will engage all necesary parties so that we're all on the same page and working together without a delay.
We have the code from Cisco and are working as fast as possible to get it out to you guys. In the meantime I encourage you to reach out to me in our direct forums at DSLR and I will gather your info and keep you updated along the way.
But to be clear neither ourselves or TWC are dragging our feet on this...it isn't as if we weren't already involved in other things that have equal or higher priority because of impact. This was preventable from the start with a little bit of communication from Tivo.
If I sound a bit irritated it's because I am. We have worked extremely hard to ensure a seamless experience for our Tivo customers and this should have been addressed company to company and not through our mutual customers. We know how to communicate with each other and what needs to be done to investigate these types of things. Customers should not be asked to call their providers and insist on tickets being submitted especially when they have my contact information already and have for quite some time.
You are correct "this was preventable", had the cable companies chose to NOT use SDV.
Never had these problems before SDV was foisted upon us.
As far as "other impacts" I do understand about the dealing with the biggest fire first. But in this case, IMO, there should have never been the ignition point caused by SDV.
Finally this is not personal BHNtechXpert, I (we) do appreciate your involvement here and the work you are doing. I fully recognize that "IT'S" not YOUR fault.