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

GitHub was having issues

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 231 posts

Re: GitHub was having issues

#201

Post by __float »

phlakaton wrote: post #198
krs_ wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, but there are some oddities in tool use compared to other industries. At my job we use Perforce for version control for example, which I think is more common in the game industry than other solutions for whatever reason. Naturally everyone here hates it.

But not everybody here has to try and manage many GB or even TB of assets in their VCS. I wager game company build/dev engineers know what they are doing in picking Perforce.

It is a _decision_ to put those assets in the same VCS as your source code. It's not one you are required to make.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#202

Post by Lammy »

shrinks99 wrote: post #160
CoderJoshDK wrote: post #84

With continued reliability issues and the CEO stepping down, now feels like such an opportune time for a competitor to start taking market share. I sure am rooting for it! For the longest time, I thought that there was absolutely no way for some of these corner stone companies (slash tech) to be toppled. And I’m very impressed with their ability to destroy consumer trust!

Between Tangled, GitLab, Codeburg (Forgejo), and Gitea there's quite a lot of decent alternatives now compared to when GitHub first sold to MS. Having the entire world of FOSS integrated in one development platform was convenient but I'm more excited by the possibilities for more innovation in the space.

And Phorge! (former Phabricator, and my favorite) https://we.phorge.it/

Re: GitHub was having issues

#204

Post by ugh123 »

everfrustrated wrote: post #42

Enterprise customers, remember to email your sales rep and ask for them to report on their contracted uptime with you that you are allowed to do as per contract. They wont do this unless you ask hoping you don't notice the outages. It creates lots of internal pain - they have no automation internally for reporting on this. This is the only way anything will ever change. GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS pro…

Customers should also then compare what the sales guy is telling you to your own metrics, and see how far off they are.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#205

Post by kingstnap »

drozycki wrote: post #181
dehrmann wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems more like a weird Hetzner thing that they won't give you a IPv4 NAT gateway.

How would a server-side NAT know which Hetzner customer it should route a request to? It has an encrypted packet arriving at this shared address on port 443. You can route a shared address to the proper service based on the HTTP Host header but that can only be done by the customer using their encryption key, so no sharing an address between customers. Home LAN NAT only works because the router can change the source…

Well, the answer is easy. It doesn't do any forwarding, so a random 443 packet gets dropped.

It would be the same as with home NAT. Your device can create TCP connections outbound but can't listen/accept.

It would solve the problem of not being able to communicate to another IPv4 server but it prevents you from hosting your own.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#206

Post by jiggawatts »

awestroke wrote: post #29
evilmonkey19 wrote: post #26

I'm a fan of github but lately i'm seeing a lot of issues like these... Also they don't have yet support for IPv6 (surprising).

The refusal to support IPv6 is embarrassing at this point

Azure has “support” for IPv6 that just “works”, so… they could just turn it on.

Oh, you’re wondering about the air quotes?

Don’t worry about it! Sales told my boss that that feature checkbox has a “tick”.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#207

Post by jiggawatts »

77pt77 wrote: post #164
depr wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that they are probably at least partly on Azure, this makes it less surprising because Azure has the worst IPv6 implementation of the 3 large cloud providers.

Possibly stupid question but, how can someone mess that up? What is wrong/missing?

I’ve gone on long rants about it before right here on HN but I can’t be bothered digging up the old post…

… the quick and dirty bullet points are:

- Enabling IPv6 in one virtual network could break managed PaaS services in other peered networks.

- Up until very recently none of the PaaS services could be configured with IPv6 firewall rules.

- Most core managed network components were IPv4 only. Firewalls, gateways, VPNs, etc… support is still spotty.

- They NAT IPv6 which is just gibbering eldrich madness.

- IPv6 addresses are handed out in tiny pools of 16 addresses at a time. No, not a /16 or anything like that.

Etc…

The IPv6 networking in Azure feels like it was implemented by offshore contractors that did as they were told and never stopped to think if any of it made sense.

References:

- Inbound IPv6 support for App Service was added this week. https://azure.microsoft.com/en-au/updates/?id=499998

- Outbound IPv6 support is "Preview": https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/app-service/overview...

- Public IP Prefixes support a maximum of 16 consecutive addresses even for IPv6: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/ip-s...

- There's an entire page of IPv6 limitations. To understand how nuts this is, just swap IPv6IPv4 and see if it still reads like a professional service you'd pay money for! https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/ip-s...

- You STILL can't use PostgreSQL with IPv6: "Even if the subnet for the Postgres Flexible Server doesn't have any IPv6 addresses assigned, it cannot be deployed if there are IPv6 addresses in the VNet." -- that's just bonkers.

- Just... oh my god:

"Azure Virtual WAN currently supports IPv4 traffic only."

"Azure Route Server currently supports IPv4 traffic only."

"Azure Firewall doesn't currently support IPv6"

"You can't add IPv6 ranges to a virtual network that has existing resource in use."

Re: GitHub was having issues

#208

Post by mmcnl »

petcat wrote: post #70
everfrustrated wrote: post #42

Enterprise customers, remember to email your sales rep and ask for them to report on their contracted uptime with you that you are allowed to do as per contract. They wont do this unless you ask hoping you don't notice the outages. It creates lots of internal pain - they have no automation internally for reporting on this. This is the only way anything will ever change. GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS pro…

> GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS product. Some of us are stuck using Atlassian and BitBucket and it is by far worse in every way.

Bitbucket is quite nice actually. It's got very little bloat and just... works?

Re: GitHub was having issues

#209

Post by 77pt77 »

jiggawatts wrote: post #207
77pt77 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possibly stupid question but, how can someone mess that up? What is wrong/missing?

I’ve gone on long rants about it before right here on HN but I can’t be bothered digging up the old post… … the quick and dirty bullet points are: - Enabling IPv6 in one virtual network could break managed PaaS services in other peered networks. - Up until very recently none of the PaaS services could be configured with IPv6 firewall rules. - Most core managed network components were IPv4 only. Firewalls, gateways, V…

> They NAT IPv6 which is just gibbering eldrich madness.

Yeah! I'm out.

What a complete lack of competence!

Re: GitHub was having issues

#210

Post by MoreQARespect »

Analemma_ wrote: post #193
FredPret wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the Unix philosophy, but for businesses. Come to think of it, this might be great advice for life in general: do one thing very well, and be modular (aka play well with others)

I wish the world worked this way, but I don't think it does, especially in tech. If you "do one thing well", the cloud hyperscalers will use their billions to copy whatever that is, and add your "one good thing" into their bundled subscriptions or cloud plans. At which point, any rational CTO will go "why should we pay for this, when we're already getting it via AWS/O365/whatever, and with better integration with our…

It works with Keiretsu. Ive long thought that this is how Europe should play catch up and build its own equivalent(s) of AWS, GCP and Azure.
Post reply on HN