My suspicion is that since a lot of internal comms runs through the FB domain and since everyone is still WFH, then its probably a massive issue just to get people talking to each other to solve the problem.
...the doors are glass right?
And I guess beyond that point, walls are glass. Or you need explosives.
Every internet-connected physical system needs to have a sensible offline fallback mode. They should have had physical keys, or at least some kind of offline RFID validation (e.g. continue to validate the last N badges that had previously successfully validated).
A few hundred bucks of glass Vs a billion wiped off the share price if the service is down for a day and all the user's go find alternatives.
I have no doubt that the publicly published post-mortem report (if there even is one) will be heavily redacted in comparison to the internal-only version. But I very much want to see said hypothetical report anyway. This kind of infrastructural stuff fascinates me. And I would hope there would be some lessons in said report that even small time operators such as myself would do well to heed.
A small company has to keep all of its customers happy (or at least be responsive when issues arise, at a bare minimum).
Massive companies deal in error budgets, where a fraction of a percent can still represent millions of users.
Enjoy.
I guess good decentralized public communication services could solve those issues for everybody.
No shit Google has plans in place for outages.
But what are these plans, are they any good... a respected industry figure who's CV includes being at Google for 10 years doesn't need to go into detail describing the IRC fallback to be believed and trusted that there is such a thing.
No-one knows or cares who made the statement, it may as well have been 'water is wet', it was useless and adds nothing but noise.
I have replied to my initial comment with provide some additonal context: https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=28752431. Hope that helps.
Google has more than 1 L8 SRE.
I was not trying to establish a trust chain.
Take from it what you will.
At some point, they must run out of names, right?
Continuous Deployment.
Disclaimer: Ex-Googler who used to work on disaster reponse. Opinions are my own.
Google has multiple independent procedures for coordination during disasters. A global DNS outage (mentioned in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28751140) was considered and has been taken into account.
I do not attempt to hide my identity here, quite the opposite: my HN profile contains my real name. Until recently a part of my job was to ensure that Google is prepared for various disasterous scenarios and that Googlers can coordinate the response independently from Google's infrastructure. I authored one of the fallback communication procedures that would likely be exercised today if Google's network experienced a global outage. Of course Google has a whole team of fantastic human beings who are deeply involved in disaster preparedness (miss you!). I am pretty sure they are going to analyze what happened to Facebook today in light of Google's emergency plans.
While this topic is really fascinating, I am unfortunately not at liberty to disclose the details as they belong to my previous employer. But when I stumble upon factually incorrect comments on HN that I am in a position to correct, why not do that?
Every year there is a DiRT week where hundreds of tests are run. That obviously requires a ton of planning that starts well in advance. The objective is, of course, that despite all the testing nobody outside Google notices anything special. Given the volume and intrusiveness of these tests, the DiRT team is doing quite an impressive job.
While the DiRT week is the most intense testing period, disaster preparedness is not limited to just one event per year. There are also plenty tests conducted througout the year, some planned centrally, some done by individual teams. That's in addition to the regular training and exercises that SRE teams are doing periodically.
If you are interested in reading more about Google's approach to distaster planning and preparedness, you may be interested in reading the DiRT, or how to get dirty section from Shrinking the time to mitigate production incidents—CRE life lessons (https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/management-tools/shri...) and Weathering the Unexpected (https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2371516).
at the lowest level in case of severe outage we resort to IRC, Plain Old Telephone Service and, sometimes, stick-it notes taped to windows...
What use is it if it runs on the same stack as what you might be trying to fix?
IRC does use DNS at least to get hostnames during connection. I'd be surprised if it didn't use it at other points.
My bet is, FB will reach out to others in FAMANG, and an interest group will form maintaining such an emergency infrastructure comm network. Basically a network for network engineers. Because media (and shareholders) will soon ask Microsoft and Google what their plans for such situations are. I'm very glad FB is not in the cloud business...
yeah if only Facebook's production engineering team had hired a team of full time IRCops for their emergency fallback network...
I remembered to publish my cell phone's real number on the on-call list rather than just my Google Voice number since if Hangouts is down, Google Voice might be too.
Backup tapes and in production servers are kept at different colocation sites to protect data from fire and other catastrophes of that level
Using colo sites on separate tectonic plates would protect you from catastrophes on a geological cataclysm level
Last time I used tape, we used Ironmountain to haul the tapes 60 miles away which was determined to be far enough for seismic safety, but that was over a decade ago.
The engineer attempted to restart the service, but did not know that a restart required a hardware security module (HSM) smart card. These smart cards were stored in multiple safes in different Google offices across the globe, but not in New York City, where the on-call engineer was located. When the service failed to restart, the engineer contacted a colleague in Australia to retrieve a smart card. To their great dismay, the engineer in Australia could not open the safe because the combination was stored in the now-offline password manager.
Source: Chapter 1 of "Building Secure and Reliable Systems" (https://sre.google/static/pdf/building_secure_and_reliable_s... size warning: 9 MB)
Safes typically have the instructions on how to change the combination glued to the inside of the door, and ending with something like "store the combination securely. Not inside the safe!"
But as they say: make something foolproof and nature will create a better fool.
its not loading for me. could you say what it said?
its not loading for me. could you say what it said?
I don’t think it’s particularly relevant to this issue with fb. I suspect they didn’t need a monitoring system to know things were going badly.
- not arrogant - or complacent - haven't inadvertently acquired the company - know your tech peers well enough to have confidence in their identity during an emergency - do regular drills to simulate everything going wrong at once
Lots of us know what should be happening right now, but think back to the many situations we've all experienced where fallback systems turned into a nightmarish war story, then scale it up by 1000. This is a historic day, I think it's quite likely that the scale of the outage will lead to the breakup of the company because it's the Big One that people have been warning about for years.
The place where I worked had failure trees for every critical app and service. The goal for incident management was to triage and have an initial escalation for the right group within 15 minutes. When I left they were like 96% on target overall and 100% for infrastructure.