6 ms·

Bit.ly was down

27 points by kmfrk 14y ago

kmfrk 14y ago
Status link: http://status.bit.ly http://status.bit.ly. EDIT: This link is much better: http://status.bit.ly/10527/137769/bit.ly http://status.bit.ly/10527/137769/bit.ly.
frankdenbow 14y ago
In general, url shorteners seem bad for the web. Something so critical to the structure of the web as links should not have a single point of failure like this.
- bhaak 14y ago
  Yes, indeed. Also, what about status pages that need javascript to work?
- kmfrk 14y ago
  If the biggest URL shortener can't figure out how to stay afloat, none of them can. Definitely roll your own, if you need to. I just need to figure out how to do it for static websites, since they don't have IDs that can be mapped to a shorturl.
  - udp 14y ago
    Or just use direct links, instead.
- covati 14y ago
  As a general idea of routing all traffic through one point, yes. However, as a marketing tool to track traffic, they are quite valuable. Sadly, optimal network routes and other considerations take a bake seat to making money.
- platzhirsch 14y ago
  “As always, all your existing bitly links will continue to work.”
- jyap 14y ago
  I agree. In dealing with anti-spam techniques, URL shorteners are used to obfuscate bad links all the time. There are only 2 use cases: - Used to actually shorten links, say in emails. To me, this isn't a valid use case. I always dump the whole URL. - Tracking and analysis. For example, Twitter injects t.co links into every Tweet with links for tracking purposes. In the case of Bit.ly, click analytics is their business model (http://www.enterprise.bitly.com http://www.enterprise.bitly.com).
  - pavel_lishin 14y ago
    The first case you mention is actually very useful in IRC, especially in clients that break up URLs into multiple lines. Compare: https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=1120+Avenue+of+the+Americas,+New+York,+NY&daddr=Yankee+Stadium,+East+161st+Street,+Bronx,+NY&hl=en&ll=40.792239,-73.955154&spn=0.10371,0.157757&sll=40.802895,-73.924084&sspn=0.103693,0.157757&geocode=FcHhbQIdhRqX-ynJiS1XVVjCiTFFAV5BZkL2Ug%3BFZgBbwIdnPiX-yEIHppV2cNASSlxaedaLPTCiTEIHppV2cNASQ&dirflg=r&ttype=dep&date=01%2F15%2F13&time=1:00pm&noexp=0&noal=0&sort=def&mra=ls&t=m&z=13&start=0 to http://is.gd/lerDux http://is.gd/lerDux - especially when you're looking at it in an IRC client: http://i.imgur.com/mqqRo.png http://i.imgur.com/mqqRo.png
    - PJones 14y ago
      In cases like that I'd use the short url that Google provides (http://goo.gl/maps/4y1Xg http://goo.gl/maps/4y1Xg). If Google is down then you can't view the map anyway. Sites providing their own short urls isn't much of a problem as far as I can see.
- Tichy 14y ago
  I suppose for url shorteners to go away, the web standards should provide for some way to provide content providers with statistics. That is what URL shorteners are most often used for, and until there exist alternatives, they'll continue to be used. Wasn't there even an attribute on links for a while, which created an outcry because it would send statistics of clicks to another URL? Don't remember the details. I understand why it created an outcry, but the fact is, people will be tracked no matter what :-(
  - calpaterson 14y ago
    Do you mean the "Referer" header? It's still used, but HTTPS often doesn't pass it.
    - raverbashing 14y ago
      No Referer works for the 'end of the link' (the webserver serving the page) Bitly and others provide statistics on the 'clicking' of the link, that is, the amount of people that clicked the link (usually published on social media, but not necessarily, by someone that's not the original content host). That's the impact they're trying to measure. And sometimes it is the content host that published these links, because of a limited capability in deriving these statistics server side (even though Google Analytics goes a long way)
    - Tichy 14y ago
      The problem with Referer is that only the server/host get's to see it. Often people publish their stuff on other people's platform, and can't access the stats.
- jhund 14y ago
  As far as I can tell, the two primary reasons for using URL shorteners are the ability to a) share long URLs via twitter and b) track clicks on shared links. The downsides to URL shorteners are: a) single point of failure for links. This one is very significant, more below. b) obscurity of a link's destination. This is mostly annoying and enables spammers to obfuscate their spam URLs. We can't overestimate the seriousness of having a single point of failure on web links: URL shorteners are a man-in-the-middle, or a choke point for the connection to a web page. All traffic has to go through the server that hosts the shortened link. And if that man-in-the-middle for some reason doesn't want to, or can't redirect to the next destination, your link is broken. And nobody can tell where it pointed to. So not only is the link broken for as long as the man-in-the-middle is not available, but nobody can find out where it led to originally. There is no workaround! So why would the man-in-the-middle not redirect the link? Here are a few reasons: * the server is down for technical reasons. This happens all the time, most recently with bit.ly. * the company that runs the server goes out of business. What do you know about the financial situation of your link shortening service provider? How can you be sure that they will still be paying for and looking after their servers in a month, a year, in 10 years? * somebody who doesn't like what you are linking to makes sure that your links are not being redirected. The incredible democratic power of the internet is being subverted by installing choke points on the internet that allow selective disabling of certain locations on the internet. And how convenient would be the ability to disable all links that point (via a choke point) to an unwanted URL. Not only could somebody break those links, but they could also destroy the information about the location of that unwanted URL with an encrypted string like "bit.ly/SDJHGe65sef". Nobody would know where the link pointed to without access to bit.ly's database. * the URL shortening service's DNS stops working. Bit.ly is registered in Libya. Who knows what regime will be in power there in a few months. Will they continue to allow Western companies to use '.ly' TLDs? By sharing shortened links on twitter, you're not dealing with one man-in-the-middle, but two: Your own shortening service and Twitter's t.co shortener. So you have two single points of failure in series. You just doubled the probability of your links being broken. It seems to me that the disadvantages and risks far outweigh the benefits of using shorteners (at least for links that I hope to be around for a while). So what are the alternatives to using shorteners? Twitter already distinguishes between displayed and expanded URLs, so there is really no need to apply choke-point shortening. The click tracking is a bit more complex. If you share links on a platform you control, you could do something similar to what google does with their search results click tracking. Or, if you want to share your links on somebody else's platform, make sure that the platform can provide you with non-invasive click analytics.
the1 14y ago
i was using bit.ly as key val storage ugh.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
stesch 14y ago
Something wrong in Libya?
shocks 14y ago
It's worth noting that existing bit.ly links still work. Check out http://bit.ly/ http://bit.ly/, the water is awesome!
- jyap 14y ago
  Maybe you have things cached in your browser? No links work for me.
  - wanghq 14y ago
    same here
  - shocks 14y ago
    Negative, I just picked a random link and it worked. I am in the UK, perhaps it works for me? From their website: >> Sorry, but bitly is getting a quick site refresh - try again in just a minute. As always, all your existing bitly links will continue to work.
wanghq 14y ago
when bit.ly is down, you start to know there are so many short urls are actually using bit.ly even they look different, e.g. btl.st/ZWP3Rv
- keesj 14y ago
  Yep, Beta List uses Bit.ly Anyone can set up their own short URL domain with them. They also allow you to export* your short-url/long-url pairs so it's possible to switch to your own shortener at a later stage if you wanted to. * The export feature might be available to Enterprise customers only. Not sure.
LogicX 14y ago
"Update: bitly links are working again, but we are continuing to work through getting http://bitly.com http://bitly.com back up." https://twitter.com/bitly/status/290459711881502722 https://twitter.com/bitly/status/290459711881502722
wanghq 14y ago
what service level agreement (SLA) does bit.ly provide? I can't find it.
egeozcan 14y ago
A business idea: Service to query the long urls for bit.ly and other shortener links which will also provide caching and history (if redirection changed, we would get to see when and from where)
- soult 14y ago
  Check out urlte.am, it is a bit similar to what you have described. (Disclaimer: I am a member of that team). The history option sounds very interesting. For example, the owners of "ethical" URL shortener is.gd do just change shorturls if they like a particual shorturl (e.g is.gd/td leads to tweetdownload.net, a site owned by the same company as is.gd. I know for a fact it previously led to a different URL.)
  - egeozcan 14y ago
    I just wanted to thank you for being awesome. This is great!
sjs382 14y ago
I created a little webapp/api that uses publisher provided short URLs when available. This helps avoid the problem posed by the shortener being down because (presumably) if the shortener is down, the content will be too. http://isshort.com http://isshort.com

27 points by kmfrk 14y ago

kmfrk 14y ago

Status link: http://status.bit.ly http://status.bit.ly. EDIT: This link is much better: http://status.bit.ly/10527/137769/bit.ly http://status.bit.ly/10527/137769/bit.ly.

frankdenbow 14y ago

In general, url shorteners seem bad for the web. Something so critical to the structure of the web as links should not have a single point of failure like this.

bhaak 14y ago
Yes, indeed. Also, what about status pages that need javascript to work?
kmfrk 14y ago
If the biggest URL shortener can't figure out how to stay afloat, none of them can. Definitely roll your own, if you need to. I just need to figure out how to do it for static websites, since they don't have IDs that can be mapped to a shorturl.
- udp 14y ago
  Or just use direct links, instead.
covati 14y ago
As a general idea of routing all traffic through one point, yes. However, as a marketing tool to track traffic, they are quite valuable. Sadly, optimal network routes and other considerations take a bake seat to making money.
platzhirsch 14y ago
“As always, all your existing bitly links will continue to work.”
jyap 14y ago
I agree. In dealing with anti-spam techniques, URL shorteners are used to obfuscate bad links all the time. There are only 2 use cases: - Used to actually shorten links, say in emails. To me, this isn't a valid use case. I always dump the whole URL. - Tracking and analysis. For example, Twitter injects t.co links into every Tweet with links for tracking purposes. In the case of Bit.ly, click analytics is their business model (http://www.enterprise.bitly.com http://www.enterprise.bitly.com).
- pavel_lishin 14y ago
  The first case you mention is actually very useful in IRC, especially in clients that break up URLs into multiple lines. Compare: https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=1120+Avenue+of+the+Americas,+New+York,+NY&daddr=Yankee+Stadium,+East+161st+Street,+Bronx,+NY&hl=en&ll=40.792239,-73.955154&spn=0.10371,0.157757&sll=40.802895,-73.924084&sspn=0.103693,0.157757&geocode=FcHhbQIdhRqX-ynJiS1XVVjCiTFFAV5BZkL2Ug%3BFZgBbwIdnPiX-yEIHppV2cNASSlxaedaLPTCiTEIHppV2cNASQ&dirflg=r&ttype=dep&date=01%2F15%2F13&time=1:00pm&noexp=0&noal=0&sort=def&mra=ls&t=m&z=13&start=0 to http://is.gd/lerDux http://is.gd/lerDux - especially when you're looking at it in an IRC client: http://i.imgur.com/mqqRo.png http://i.imgur.com/mqqRo.png
  - PJones 14y ago
    In cases like that I'd use the short url that Google provides (http://goo.gl/maps/4y1Xg http://goo.gl/maps/4y1Xg). If Google is down then you can't view the map anyway. Sites providing their own short urls isn't much of a problem as far as I can see.
Tichy 14y ago
I suppose for url shorteners to go away, the web standards should provide for some way to provide content providers with statistics. That is what URL shorteners are most often used for, and until there exist alternatives, they'll continue to be used. Wasn't there even an attribute on links for a while, which created an outcry because it would send statistics of clicks to another URL? Don't remember the details. I understand why it created an outcry, but the fact is, people will be tracked no matter what :-(
- calpaterson 14y ago
  Do you mean the "Referer" header? It's still used, but HTTPS often doesn't pass it.
  - raverbashing 14y ago
    No Referer works for the 'end of the link' (the webserver serving the page) Bitly and others provide statistics on the 'clicking' of the link, that is, the amount of people that clicked the link (usually published on social media, but not necessarily, by someone that's not the original content host). That's the impact they're trying to measure. And sometimes it is the content host that published these links, because of a limited capability in deriving these statistics server side (even though Google Analytics goes a long way)
  - Tichy 14y ago
    The problem with Referer is that only the server/host get's to see it. Often people publish their stuff on other people's platform, and can't access the stats.
jhund 14y ago
As far as I can tell, the two primary reasons for using URL shorteners are the ability to a) share long URLs via twitter and b) track clicks on shared links. The downsides to URL shorteners are: a) single point of failure for links. This one is very significant, more below. b) obscurity of a link's destination. This is mostly annoying and enables spammers to obfuscate their spam URLs. We can't overestimate the seriousness of having a single point of failure on web links: URL shorteners are a man-in-the-middle, or a choke point for the connection to a web page. All traffic has to go through the server that hosts the shortened link. And if that man-in-the-middle for some reason doesn't want to, or can't redirect to the next destination, your link is broken. And nobody can tell where it pointed to. So not only is the link broken for as long as the man-in-the-middle is not available, but nobody can find out where it led to originally. There is no workaround! So why would the man-in-the-middle not redirect the link? Here are a few reasons: * the server is down for technical reasons. This happens all the time, most recently with bit.ly. * the company that runs the server goes out of business. What do you know about the financial situation of your link shortening service provider? How can you be sure that they will still be paying for and looking after their servers in a month, a year, in 10 years? * somebody who doesn't like what you are linking to makes sure that your links are not being redirected. The incredible democratic power of the internet is being subverted by installing choke points on the internet that allow selective disabling of certain locations on the internet. And how convenient would be the ability to disable all links that point (via a choke point) to an unwanted URL. Not only could somebody break those links, but they could also destroy the information about the location of that unwanted URL with an encrypted string like "bit.ly/SDJHGe65sef". Nobody would know where the link pointed to without access to bit.ly's database. * the URL shortening service's DNS stops working. Bit.ly is registered in Libya. Who knows what regime will be in power there in a few months. Will they continue to allow Western companies to use '.ly' TLDs? By sharing shortened links on twitter, you're not dealing with one man-in-the-middle, but two: Your own shortening service and Twitter's t.co shortener. So you have two single points of failure in series. You just doubled the probability of your links being broken. It seems to me that the disadvantages and risks far outweigh the benefits of using shorteners (at least for links that I hope to be around for a while). So what are the alternatives to using shorteners? Twitter already distinguishes between displayed and expanded URLs, so there is really no need to apply choke-point shortening. The click tracking is a bit more complex. If you share links on a platform you control, you could do something similar to what google does with their search results click tracking. Or, if you want to share your links on somebody else's platform, make sure that the platform can provide you with non-invasive click analytics.

the1 14y ago

i was using bit.ly as key val storage ugh.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

stesch 14y ago

Something wrong in Libya?

shocks 14y ago

It's worth noting that existing bit.ly links still work. Check out http://bit.ly/ http://bit.ly/, the water is awesome!

jyap 14y ago
Maybe you have things cached in your browser? No links work for me.
- wanghq 14y ago
  same here
- shocks 14y ago
  Negative, I just picked a random link and it worked. I am in the UK, perhaps it works for me? From their website: >> Sorry, but bitly is getting a quick site refresh - try again in just a minute. As always, all your existing bitly links will continue to work.

wanghq 14y ago

when bit.ly is down, you start to know there are so many short urls are actually using bit.ly even they look different, e.g. btl.st/ZWP3Rv

keesj 14y ago
Yep, Beta List uses Bit.ly Anyone can set up their own short URL domain with them. They also allow you to export* your short-url/long-url pairs so it's possible to switch to your own shortener at a later stage if you wanted to. * The export feature might be available to Enterprise customers only. Not sure.

LogicX 14y ago

"Update: bitly links are working again, but we are continuing to work through getting http://bitly.com http://bitly.com back up." https://twitter.com/bitly/status/290459711881502722 https://twitter.com/bitly/status/290459711881502722

wanghq 14y ago

what service level agreement (SLA) does bit.ly provide? I can't find it.

egeozcan 14y ago

A business idea: Service to query the long urls for bit.ly and other shortener links which will also provide caching and history (if redirection changed, we would get to see when and from where)

soult 14y ago
Check out urlte.am, it is a bit similar to what you have described. (Disclaimer: I am a member of that team). The history option sounds very interesting. For example, the owners of "ethical" URL shortener is.gd do just change shorturls if they like a particual shorturl (e.g is.gd/td leads to tweetdownload.net, a site owned by the same company as is.gd. I know for a fact it previously led to a different URL.)
- egeozcan 14y ago
  I just wanted to thank you for being awesome. This is great!

sjs382 14y ago

I created a little webapp/api that uses publisher provided short URLs when available. This helps avoid the problem posed by the shortener being down because (presumably) if the shortener is down, the content will be too. http://isshort.com http://isshort.com