>Configuration changes are dangerous for CF it seems, and knocked down $NET almost 4% today. I wonder what the industry wide impact is for each of these outages?
This is becoming the "new normal." It seems like every few months, there's another "outage" that takes down vast swathes of internet properties, since they're all dependent on a few platforms and those platforms are, clearly, poorly run.
This isn't rocket surgery here. Strong change management, QA processes and active business continuity planning/infrastructure would likely have caught this (or not), as is clear from other large platforms that we don't even think about because outages are so rare.
Like airline reservations systems[0], credit card authorization systems from VISA/MasterCard, American Express, etc.
Those systems (and others) have outages in the "once a decade" or even much, much, longer ranges. Are the folks over at SABRE and American Express that much smarter and better than Cloudflare/AWS/Google Cloud/etc.? No. Not even close. What they are is careful as they know their business is dependent on making sure their customers can use their services anytime/anywhere, without issue.
It amazes me the level of "Stockholm Syndrome"[1] expressed by many posting to this thread, expressing relief that it wasn't "an attack" and essentially blaming themselves for not having the right tools (API keys, etc.) to recover from the gross incompetence of, this time at least, Cloudflare.
I don't doubt that I'll get lots of push back from folks claiming, "it's hard to do things at scale," and/or "there are way too many moving parts," and the like.
Other organizations like the ones I mention above don't screw they're customers every 4-6 months with (clearly) insufficiently tested configuration and infrastructure changes.
Yet many here seem to think that's fine, even though such outages are often crushing to their businesses. But if the customers of these huge providers don't demand better, they'll only get worse. And that's not (at least in my experience) a very deep or profound idea.
This is becoming the "new normal." It seems like every few months, there's another "outage" that takes down vast swathes of internet properties, since they're all dependent on a few platforms and those platforms are, clearly, poorly run.
This isn't rocket surgery here. Strong change management, QA processes and active business continuity planning/infrastructure would likely have caught this (or not), as is clear from other large platforms that we don't even think about because outages are so rare.
Like airline reservations systems[0], credit card authorization systems from VISA/MasterCard, American Express, etc.
Those systems (and others) have outages in the "once a decade" or even much, much, longer ranges. Are the folks over at SABRE and American Express that much smarter and better than Cloudflare/AWS/Google Cloud/etc.? No. Not even close. What they are is careful as they know their business is dependent on making sure their customers can use their services anytime/anywhere, without issue.
It amazes me the level of "Stockholm Syndrome"[1] expressed by many posting to this thread, expressing relief that it wasn't "an attack" and essentially blaming themselves for not having the right tools (API keys, etc.) to recover from the gross incompetence of, this time at least, Cloudflare.
I don't doubt that I'll get lots of push back from folks claiming, "it's hard to do things at scale," and/or "there are way too many moving parts," and the like.
Other organizations like the ones I mention above don't screw they're customers every 4-6 months with (clearly) insufficiently tested configuration and infrastructure changes.
Yet many here seem to think that's fine, even though such outages are often crushing to their businesses. But if the customers of these huge providers don't demand better, they'll only get worse. And that's not (at least in my experience) a very deep or profound idea.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_reservations_system
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome