Live data from Hacker News

Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

blog.cloudflare.com

111–120 of 158 posts

Re: Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

#111
post #47
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in this camp. To me, 'literally' has only one meaning. If it doesn't, the word loses all utility. He could say 'is essentially the glue', I suppose.

You are outdated to the extent that you would have been behind the times in the 1680s where the word was already being used to mean 'what follows must be taken in the strongest admissible sense'.

Well, they make a valid point in that a word carries with it implicit attributes that should also be taken into account.

It's what really separates bad writing from very bad writing.

Then again, it's also a perspective thing.

Re: Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

#112
At some point anonymous is going to figure out the bgp 'hack' is actually exploitable, unlike taking the root name servers offline and we see a network routing outage for several days. I wish it wasn't so but sometimes that is the only way these things get fixed

Re: Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

#113
post #47
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in this camp. To me, 'literally' has only one meaning. If it doesn't, the word loses all utility. He could say 'is essentially the glue', I suppose.

You are outdated to the extent that you would have been behind the times in the 1680s where the word was already being used to mean 'what follows must be taken in the strongest admissible sense'.

Curious why such a specific time period. Is there a source for 1680s? The 17th century would probably be sufficient otherwise.

Re: Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

#115

At some point anonymous is going to figure out the bgp 'hack' is actually exploitable, unlike taking the root name servers offline and we see a network routing outage for several days. I wish it wasn't so but sometimes that is the only way these things get fixed

First of all to pull off this "hack" you need a router, an AS number, a transit contract with your upstream provider, BGP configured with said upstream, and most importantly your upstream needs to be negligent enough to not apply route filters to your session (which basically means I will only accept routes for IPs owned by company X over company X's session).

Secondly, it is pretty easy to track down who is doing it. Assuming a rouge employee used their employers setup (see first point) to announce once of Google's routes and it managed to propagate, smart people at NOCs around the world start emailing and calling each other pretty quickly. Despite CloudFlare trying to take credit here, I'd put money on the fact the network in question received at least a dozen phone calls and emails. There are services like Renesys and BGPmon that "important" companies sign up for that will scream bloody murder and start paging people if someone unauthorized originates your prefixes.

Third, as this is a known problem, a solution is already in the works and on its way to being implemented. Basically when you are assigned a block of IP addresses, you also get to publish a cryptographically signed statement of how and where that block should show up in the global routing table. See http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog49/presentations/Tuesday/...

Re: Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

#116
post #12

The author (Tom Paseka) wrote near the conclusion that himself addressed the Google's issue, by contacting a Moratel's engineer. Do you have the same feeling when reading the article? It sounds weird that Google did not triggered a recovery procedure on its own. Maybe I see bad things everywhere and you may call paranoïd, but could it be some sort of ("false") advertising on the side of cloudfare?

It sounds like cloudflare simply got there first. Unless cloudflare is outright lying (highly unlikely) they saw a problem they could fix, and fixed it. What's the false advertising there?

They didn't fix anything. Multiple people noticed, all of them contacted the network in question, then they took credit publicly when another network fixed its mistake.

Re: Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

#118
post #47
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in this camp. To me, 'literally' has only one meaning. If it doesn't, the word loses all utility. He could say 'is essentially the glue', I suppose.

You are outdated to the extent that you would have been behind the times in the 1680s where the word was already being used to mean 'what follows must be taken in the strongest admissible sense'.

That's fine, as long as you have an alternative ready that takes the meaning that the old "literally" had when I do want the statement to be taken, er, literally.

If you don't, then it makes a lot of sense to defend literal from non-literal usage.

What's the alternative that I can use and be understood?

Re: Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

#119
DAE think that the whole "BGP is broken!" argument is a bit overblown?

If you're going to have a bunch of autonomous systems/networks operating together, with no central authority, it necessarily comes down to trust and relationships.

Shit will occasionally happen. It's important to look at outages, figure out the cause, and work to prevent it. Perhaps, though, this is a best practices issue, and not some fundamental flaw in BGP.

Re: Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works

#120
post #118
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are outdated to the extent that you would have been behind the times in the 1680s where the word was already being used to mean 'what follows must be taken in the strongest admissible sense'.

That's fine, as long as you have an alternative ready that takes the meaning that the old "literally" had when I do want the statement to be taken, er, literally. If you don't, then it makes a lot of sense to defend literal from non-literal usage. What's the alternative that I can use and be understood?

Context.
Post reply on HN