We, as in people in this forum, know that status pages are worthless. They’re tools with the explicit purpose of reducing the burden on tier one customer support. That’s it. They are not a public monitoring platform.
AWS on the other hand... We usually just reach out to our TAMs and say "Hey, our application monitoring is showing tons of errors interacting with service X--can you check your super secret internal dashboards and see what the deal is?"
It's nice to at least have a "Yeah the service is completely hosed and in a bad place" or a "Yeah, some changes went wrong and are being rolled back". The former usually requires some sort of mitigation while the latter can largely be ignored
A colleague saw it on twitter.
So yes, it's useful
Coincidence, or have they gotten around to moving some of their infrastructure to Azure since the MS acquisition?
I'm guessing they probably get the elasticity of cloud while paying the wholesale or at-cost of the infrastructure (surely they get some discounts over the advertised price, at least)
> Azure DNS is now being offered at a 100% availability SLA that's backed by our diverse, geo-redundant DNS infrastructure.
> With this update, Azure DNS guarantees that valid DNS requests will receive a response from at least one name server 100% of the time. For details, see the SLA definition.
This hasn't aged well
I'm now seeing all outbound DNS lookups from my Heroku instances failing.
What is going on?
> We are aware of an issue affecting the Azure Portal and Azure services, please visit our alternate Status Page here https://status2.azure.com for more information and updates.
What do you guys think? Is secondary DNS in this case worth it?