5 ms·

11 days is a very long response time, but do you really think a quicker response would have changed the end result? GitHub is a massively multi-tenant SaaS. Whe

11 days is a very long response time, but do you really think a quicker response would have changed the end result? GitHub is a massively multi-tenant SaaS. When they have an outage there’s really not much customers or GitHub’s support team can do other than wait for the outage to be resolved.

zamalek 4y ago
Amazon and Azure have much larger multi-tenant concerns and are able to pull of an SLA.
- deathanatos 4y ago
  Really? I've been ignored on Azure tickets for longer than their stated SLA. During outages, too.
  - zamalek 4y ago
    Anecdata: we haven't seen that with Azure. At least you have an SLA, so they'll refund/discount you.
    - deathanatos 4y ago
      That's incredible to me. Their support is completely and utterly inept, AFAICT. Just today, I've been asked for what availability for a meeting I have between the hours of 9pm and 6am (and no, that's not a typo!). You can't paste errors into the ticket. Their support system doesn't even support all of printable ASCII. The reps don't read the ticket before responding. If you can't replicate the error in front of their eyes, it doesn't exist, and even if you can, they won't believe you. I've literally had them defend 56 kpbs as being "good enough throughput", I've had "What is your ISP?" on "we get 500 Internal Server Error from $service" (and … our ISP is you, Azure…) … yeah. The list of idiocy we've seen just goes on and on and on. Their support team wants to talk about "how can we architect a cloud system that'll blah blah enterprise blah", I just want valid API calls to succeed. I'm an eng, I can do the building, I just need APIs that aren't hot garbage. (The outage I allude to in the above comment is actually mentioned in passing in [1]. I had to link to that blog post in the support ticket! (So thank you, Scott Helme, for writing it.)) [1]: https://scotthelme.co.uk/lets-encrypt-root-expiration-post-mortem/ https://scotthelme.co.uk/lets-encrypt-root-expiration-post-m...
      - jiggawatts 4y ago
        “ Microsoft Azure Application Gateway was no longer connecting to servers using a Let's Encrypt certificate” Why would you expect TLS to work correctly on a HTTP load balancer that can’t do HTTP properly either? Microsoft App Gateway is incompatible with Microsoft’s own SharePoint server for example because it doesn’t send a user agent header in the health monitor probes, which about 50% of all web apps require. Similarly it can’t send authentication headers either so it can’t monitor web apps that enforce security. It’s a security product incompatible with security and encryption. Let that sink in and then look at what you’re paying for this on your next monthly bill.
        deathanatos 4y ago
        > Why would you expect TLS to work correctly on a HTTP load balancer that can’t do HTTP properly either? Well, it doesn't exactly advertise that on the tin, now does it? And we're not using it as a security product (I know there are people out there after "WAF"s and … stuff … but that's not us); AFAICT, it is Azure's offering equivalent to AWS's ELB. (It is tempting to remove it from the architecture, but unfortunately, we're integrating with a third-party in this case that wants it that way. Everywhere else we need an HTTP proxy we use nginx…)
        jiggawatts 4y ago
        Most of my clients are big enterprise, and they insist on ticking the "WAF" checkbox. Unfortunately, App Gateway is pretty much the only Azure-native option for this. Front Door also has a WAF module, but it's even worse. Microsoft markets both as "security" products. Speaking of Front Door: it's a CDN, TCP accelerator, and TLS offload performance product that slowed down web site performance in every test that I've ever done with it. It doesn't even begin to approach the features of some of its competitors. For example it still can't do HTTP/3 or TLS v1.3. Or Brotli, or ZStandard, or multi path TCP, or anything really that helps performance.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
javagram 4y ago
Multi-tenant SaaS do have outages that affect small numbers of customers sometimes (e.g. a bug triggered by data specific to a customer). If their support isn’t paying attention to tickets, they may not even know there’s a problem or they may be slow to respond.
hatware 4y ago
> do you really think a quicker response would have changed the end result Communication matters a lot. A response within 24 hours means they would be ten days ahead. Yes, that is better than being 11 days behind. Waiting is what the customers do, the provider needs to communicate, at the very least, that they are aware of the problem and looking into it.

zamalek 4y ago

Amazon and Azure have much larger multi-tenant concerns and are able to pull of an SLA.

deathanatos 4y ago
Really? I've been ignored on Azure tickets for longer than their stated SLA. During outages, too.
- zamalek 4y ago
  Anecdata: we haven't seen that with Azure. At least you have an SLA, so they'll refund/discount you.
  - deathanatos 4y ago
    That's incredible to me. Their support is completely and utterly inept, AFAICT. Just today, I've been asked for what availability for a meeting I have between the hours of 9pm and 6am (and no, that's not a typo!). You can't paste errors into the ticket. Their support system doesn't even support all of printable ASCII. The reps don't read the ticket before responding. If you can't replicate the error in front of their eyes, it doesn't exist, and even if you can, they won't believe you. I've literally had them defend 56 kpbs as being "good enough throughput", I've had "What is your ISP?" on "we get 500 Internal Server Error from $service" (and … our ISP is you, Azure…) … yeah. The list of idiocy we've seen just goes on and on and on. Their support team wants to talk about "how can we architect a cloud system that'll blah blah enterprise blah", I just want valid API calls to succeed. I'm an eng, I can do the building, I just need APIs that aren't hot garbage. (The outage I allude to in the above comment is actually mentioned in passing in [1]. I had to link to that blog post in the support ticket! (So thank you, Scott Helme, for writing it.)) [1]: https://scotthelme.co.uk/lets-encrypt-root-expiration-post-mortem/ https://scotthelme.co.uk/lets-encrypt-root-expiration-post-m...
    - jiggawatts 4y ago
      “ Microsoft Azure Application Gateway was no longer connecting to servers using a Let's Encrypt certificate” Why would you expect TLS to work correctly on a HTTP load balancer that can’t do HTTP properly either? Microsoft App Gateway is incompatible with Microsoft’s own SharePoint server for example because it doesn’t send a user agent header in the health monitor probes, which about 50% of all web apps require. Similarly it can’t send authentication headers either so it can’t monitor web apps that enforce security. It’s a security product incompatible with security and encryption. Let that sink in and then look at what you’re paying for this on your next monthly bill.
      - deathanatos 4y ago
        > Why would you expect TLS to work correctly on a HTTP load balancer that can’t do HTTP properly either? Well, it doesn't exactly advertise that on the tin, now does it? And we're not using it as a security product (I know there are people out there after "WAF"s and … stuff … but that's not us); AFAICT, it is Azure's offering equivalent to AWS's ELB. (It is tempting to remove it from the architecture, but unfortunately, we're integrating with a third-party in this case that wants it that way. Everywhere else we need an HTTP proxy we use nginx…)
        jiggawatts 4y ago
        Most of my clients are big enterprise, and they insist on ticking the "WAF" checkbox. Unfortunately, App Gateway is pretty much the only Azure-native option for this. Front Door also has a WAF module, but it's even worse. Microsoft markets both as "security" products. Speaking of Front Door: it's a CDN, TCP accelerator, and TLS offload performance product that slowed down web site performance in every test that I've ever done with it. It doesn't even begin to approach the features of some of its competitors. For example it still can't do HTTP/3 or TLS v1.3. Or Brotli, or ZStandard, or multi path TCP, or anything really that helps performance.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

javagram 4y ago

Multi-tenant SaaS do have outages that affect small numbers of customers sometimes (e.g. a bug triggered by data specific to a customer). If their support isn’t paying attention to tickets, they may not even know there’s a problem or they may be slow to respond.

hatware 4y ago

> do you really think a quicker response would have changed the end result Communication matters a lot. A response within 24 hours means they would be ten days ahead. Yes, that is better than being 11 days behind. Waiting is what the customers do, the provider needs to communicate, at the very least, that they are aware of the problem and looking into it.