Live data from Hacker News

MS Azure down: An emerging issue is being investigated

status2.azure.com

51–60 of 131 posts

Re: MS Azure down: An emerging issue is being investigated

#51
post #34

Looks like this took down the national emergency alert system in Canada. I'm registered as an alert LMD (last mile distributor), and Pelmorex (corporation running the system) just emailed me to say "Please note that currently there is an unexpected significant outage on Microsoft Azure that is affecting the availability of the NAADS system and other clients globally. The NAAD System feeds are currently not accessible…

And here it is, the main problem with outsourcing critical infrastructure. Remote server providers like Microsoft Azure should at most be used as twins/redundant systems to a locally managed system. Governments of the world: pay your IT people more money to prevent brain drain.

So you think local IT can acheive the same high availability and elasticity? Sorry that isn't usually my experience. Lots of anecdotal local IT get lucky, but on average I think this is the wrong lesson to learn.

Re: MS Azure down: An emerging issue is being investigated

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marginally, if anything. Non-technical users misattribute and misunderstand causes of outages. There’s a comment on the AWS page complaining that iTunes gift cards are being slow to arrive. The Google page has people who think the comments are the place to talk to Google support. A major outage will make itself known in far clearer ways.

> Non-technical users misattribute and misunderstand causes of outages. The website simply answers the question "is anyone else having trouble accessing this?" In practice that's all it does, and that is useful.

Sure, but that doesn't prove the claim that was made: that several sites are experiencing a DNS DDoS attack. Occam's razor here, with the proof presented, is that people are misattributing the Azure outage.

Re: MS Azure down: An emerging issue is being investigated

#56
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here it is, the main problem with outsourcing critical infrastructure. Remote server providers like Microsoft Azure should at most be used as twins/redundant systems to a locally managed system. Governments of the world: pay your IT people more money to prevent brain drain.

Do you think locally managed systems are immune to outages? Or that governments are capable of resourcing their teams sufficiently to do a better job at availability than Microsoft, Google, or Amazon?

Your comment is a fine example of the standard rhetoric from the 'move everything to the cloud' marketing people, but perhaps organizations should consider that they don't have to go with one cloud provider as a single point of failure. It's the lazy way of abstracting away responsibility and blame to some other party, and in my experience often does not result in better availability than a properly implemented "belt and suspenders" approach.

Re: MS Azure down: An emerging issue is being investigated

#57
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here it is, the main problem with outsourcing critical infrastructure. Remote server providers like Microsoft Azure should at most be used as twins/redundant systems to a locally managed system. Governments of the world: pay your IT people more money to prevent brain drain.

So you think local IT can acheive the same high availability and elasticity? Sorry that isn't usually my experience. Lots of anecdotal local IT get lucky, but on average I think this is the wrong lesson to learn.

> can acheive the same high availability and elasticity

Maybe not, but even just a "flick the switch to go back to a dumb system" option is worth maintaining

Re: MS Azure down: An emerging issue is being investigated

#59
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think locally managed systems are immune to outages? Or that governments are capable of resourcing their teams sufficiently to do a better job at availability than Microsoft, Google, or Amazon?

Your comment is a fine example of the standard rhetoric from the 'move everything to the cloud' marketing people, but perhaps organizations should consider that they don't have to go with one cloud provider as a single point of failure. It's the lazy way of abstracting away responsibility and blame to some other party, and in my experience often does not result in better availability than a properly implemented "belt…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN