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

431–440 of 499 posts

Re: Cloudflare was down

#431

Post by slenk »

parliament32 wrote: post #385
adsjhdashkj wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like for a lot of sites CF & CDNs are the only way to survive Reddit/HN/etc - do you disagree? I definitely agree in concept with you, but then i think back to how frequently script kiddies took down sites ~10 years ago, or w/e. I feel like what has changes is the massive CDNs in front of so many sites. So while i do want a better solution, i'm not sure what it looks like. Thoughts?

Does it really matter? If you're small, who cares if you go down for half an hour? What, you'll make $0.02 this hour instead of $0.05? If you're big, you can afford your own infrastructure. Stick a few servers in a few colos around the world and you'll have better uptime than CF and friends anyway.

You're talking thousands of dollars for colo servers vs. free for CF

Re: Cloudflare was down

#432

Post by encom »

michel-slm wrote: post #301
rococode wrote: post #9

Discord is entirely down right now, both the website and the app itself. Amusingly, a lot of the sites that normally track outages are also down, which made me think it was my internet at first. Downdetector, monitortheinternet, etc. Lots of other big sites that are down: Patreon, npmjs, DigitalOcean, Coinbase, Zendesk, Medium, GitLab (502), Fiverr, Upwork, Udemy Edit: 15 min later, looks like things are starting to…

Freenode's IRC servers were down which was unexpected for me. I was expecting old-school communication networks to not have a dependency on Cloudflare.

I've had no connection interruptions to the three IRC networks I'm connected to. Freenode, EFnet and Hackint.

I loathe Discord, and I can barely contain myself with schadenfreude at this news.

Re: Cloudflare was down

#433

Post by iso947 »

fivre wrote: post #353
rozab wrote: post #136

We can't keep going on like this. The vulnerability of centralised internet infrastructure is a huge problem for everyone. Somebody, somewhere, really ought to sort it all out

10-20 minute router misconfigurations and subsequent fixes are sometimes a fact of life. big network infrastructure is complicated, and sometimes the best laid route tables of mice and men do go abloop and die. Outages happen no matter what the infrastructure is. There's no solution, they're just something you need to recognize and handle, which Cloudflare seemingly did relatively quickly here.

Think Back to the 80s. Imagine you’re watching the super bowl. Imagine it goes off for 15 minutes.

Re: Cloudflare was down

#434

Post by ci5er »

viraptor wrote: post #429
ci5er wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike Reddit, logged in and logged out users largely see the same thing. I wouldn't imagine there is much logic involved in serving personalized pages, when they don't care who you are.

The username is embedded in the page, so you can't do full caching unfortunately. But the whole content could be easily cached and concatenated to header/footer.

Oh! I have never looked an HN frames, etc., but I assumed the header was separate. Thank you!

Re: Cloudflare was down

#435

Post by root_axis »

ksec wrote: post #331
snazz wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't think so. They used to use Cloudflare but stopped. To my knowledge, it's a single server without a database (using the filesystem as a database).

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…

I don't get this comment, what does page serving performance have to do with "the modern web"? It's not as if serving up a js payload would make it more difficult to host millions of requests on a single machine, html and js are both just text.

Re: Cloudflare was down

#436

Post by deadbunny »

ci5er wrote: post #406
rodgerd wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

AWS only auto scales if you configure it to...

Re: Cloudflare was down

#437

Post by zackees »

brian-armstrong wrote: post #401
zackees wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

CEO's are notorious liars. I just had a discussion with John McAfee who said that all good CEO's are feeding misinformation to the press as standard business practice.

You can see it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_QWrzjKC9I&lc=UgyXzVtjVLbEs...

The willingness that you believe a CEO who has every incentive to lie to the press, and the preposterous narrative that this was a simple "router issue" - as if half the USA internet system is dependent on a router not failing and there is not redundancy, is simply baffling.

I don't care how many downvotes I get. I'm not buying this flimsy narrative. And neither should you.

This was a coordinated attack.

Re: Cloudflare was down

#438

Post by nobleach »

toast0 wrote: post #329
nobleach wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good DNS practice (at least when I did system admin 10 years ago) was ALWAYS having a secondary at some other location/network. Why do we just put some info in Cloudflare and call it good these days?

It's hard to use Cloudflare as a reverse proxy without using them as your delegated name servers (maybe you can use CNAMEs on paid plans?), and fancy dynamic nameservers make it hard to run secondary servers with zone transfers.

This is definitely the answer I needed.

Re: Cloudflare was down

#439

Post by schoolornot »

Meekro wrote: post #315
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.

Agreed, but the real problem is DDoS and nobody seems to know how to globally solve it. Fighting DDoS is expensive, so you see consolidation. It's well and good to live in a tiny farming town but when raiders start attacking every week, those castle walls and guards start to look really appealing.

It's nice that Cloudflare provides their services for free but scrubbing has existed for a long time. With your own address space and an appropriate budget it's not difficult to have Cloudflare/Akamai/AWS announce your IP space with a higher weight than a direct path to your infrastructure. That will give you a little bit more fault tolerance for incidents like these.
Post reply on HN