Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cloudflare was down

cloudflarestatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 499 posts

Re: Cloudflare was down

#401

Post by brian-armstrong »

zackees wrote: post #394
kohtatsu wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ówò

This was a coordinated attack that took down a bunch of services all at the same time: https://downdetector.com/ https://twitter.com/KEEMSTAR/status/1284240539437740033 Update: People are accusing me of using KEEMSTAR as a source and have somehow missed the link to downdetector.com, which keemstar is looking at.

This was a BGP/routing issue and has already been documented. Please don't spread misinformation and hysteria, especially on technical issues like this

https://twitter.com/eastdakota/status/1284253034596331520

Re: Cloudflare was down

#402

Post by dtertman »

zackees wrote: post #394
kohtatsu wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ówò

This was a coordinated attack that took down a bunch of services all at the same time: https://downdetector.com/ https://twitter.com/KEEMSTAR/status/1284240539437740033 Update: People are accusing me of using KEEMSTAR as a source and have somehow missed the link to downdetector.com, which keemstar is looking at.

It was no such thing. A Cloudflare router advertised some bad routes.

Re: Cloudflare was down

#404

Post by cmroanirgo »

blhack wrote: post #357
ksec wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So HN is serving 5.5M page view daily (excluding API access ) on a single server without CDN and without a database? Holy crap I am thinking either there is some magic or everything we are doing in the modern web are wrong. Edit: The number is from Dang [1] > These days around 5.5M page views daily and something like 5M unique readers a month, depending on how you try to count them. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/i…

>Holy crap I am thinking either there is some magic or everything we are doing in the modern web are wrong. Spin up an apache installation and see how many requests you can serve per second if you're just serving static files off of an SSD. It's a lot. edit: I see that there are already a bunch of other comments to this effect. I think you're comment is really going to bring out the old timers, haha. From my perspect…

>* From my perspective, the "modern web" is absolutely insane. *

Agreed.

I was brought up as a computer systems engineer... So, not a scientist, but I always worked with the basic premise of keep it simple. I've worked on projects where we built all the fangled clustering and master/slave (sorry to the PC crowd, but that's what it was called) stuff but never once needed it in practice. Our stuff could easily handle saturated gigabit networks as the 2 core cpu only running at 40%. We had cpu spare and could always add more network cards before we needed to split the server. It was less maintenance, for sure. It also had self healing so that some packets could be dropped if the client config allowed it, if the server decided it wanted to (but only ever did on the odd dodgey client connection)

That said, I was always impressed by the map-reduce of for search results (yes, I know they've moved on) which showed how massive systems can be fast too. It seemed that the rest of the world wanted to become like Google, and the complexity grew for the std software shop, when it didn't need to imho.

I jumped ship at that point and went embedded, which was a whole lot more fun for me.

Sincerely, old timer

Re: Cloudflare was down

#405

Post by ci5er »

manquer wrote: post #370
ksec wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So HN is serving 5.5M page view daily (excluding API access ) on a single server without CDN and without a database? Holy crap I am thinking either there is some magic or everything we are doing in the modern web are wrong. Edit: The number is from Dang [1] > These days around 5.5M page views daily and something like 5M unique readers a month, depending on how you try to count them. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/i…

It is certainly doable , PoF was running lot of page views famously of a single IIS server for a long time . HN is written in a lisp variant and most the stack is built in-house , it is not difficult to imagine efficiency improvements when many abstraction layers have been removed from your stack .

I don't remember PoF being famous for that, but they got a lot of bang for the buck on their serving costs.

What I do remember, is that it was a social data collection experiment for a couple of social scientists, that never originally expected that many people would actually find ways to find each other and hook up using it.

I miss their old findings reports about how weird humans are and what they lie about. Now, it's just plain boring with no insights released to the public.

Re: Cloudflare was down

#406

Post by ci5er »

rodgerd wrote: post #360
ksec wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So HN is serving 5.5M page view daily (excluding API access ) on a single server without CDN and without a database? Holy crap I am thinking either there is some magic or everything we are doing in the modern web are wrong. Edit: The number is from Dang [1] > These days around 5.5M page views daily and something like 5M unique readers a month, depending on how you try to count them. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/i…

Back in 2000 a joke project of mine got slashdotted. Ran outta bandwidth before anything else.

With DO, these days, they don't run me out of bandwidth, but my instance falls over (depending on what I am doing - which ain't much), but with AWS, they auto-scale and I get a $5000 bill at the end of the month. I prefer the former.

Re: Cloudflare was down

#407

Post by kingbirdy »

zackees wrote: post #394
kohtatsu wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ówò

This was a coordinated attack that took down a bunch of services all at the same time: https://downdetector.com/ https://twitter.com/KEEMSTAR/status/1284240539437740033 Update: People are accusing me of using KEEMSTAR as a source and have somehow missed the link to downdetector.com, which keemstar is looking at.

I wouldn't count on Keemstar as a reliable source of cyber-attack coverage

Re: Cloudflare was down

#408

Post by [deleted] »

jeremyjh wrote: post #168
ashleyn wrote: post #107

It really defies the original vision of the internet to have so many services depend on a single company. Almost every news site I was reading dropped off at once. I thought for a second that I lost internet in my own house.

Yes its really odd that core backbone providers can go down and everything works like its supposed to. Even trans-pacific cables can be cut and things will usually work with only increased latency. But there is not much redundancy for many companies at this layer; having redundant DNS providers is I'm sure possible but not something we think about very often, and of course many of the sites that are down are dependin…

[deleted]

Re: Cloudflare was down

#410

Post by [deleted] »

woolcap wrote: post #228
jeremyjh wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes its really odd that core backbone providers can go down and everything works like its supposed to. Even trans-pacific cables can be cut and things will usually work with only increased latency. But there is not much redundancy for many companies at this layer; having redundant DNS providers is I'm sure possible but not something we think about very often, and of course many of the sites that are down are dependin…

Redundant DNS is possible, but challenging when you're making use of features like geo DNS that don't lend themselves to easy replication via zone transfer.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN