On 01/27/2016 09:30 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
Just a quick FYI, for those people out there who thought that I was being unrealistic and/or alarmist: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/01/28/github_outage/
It was reported on NANOG that this was the web interface only. The ssh interface (which is what developers use to actually update their repos, push changes, etc.) was still working.
It's also worth noting for those that are not familiar with git that one of its strengths is that you can trivially clone the repository itself, and work locally from your cloned copy. So the only thing that actually wasn't working was the ability to see things on the web, and the ability for folks to push their latest updates to github itself. Users who were taking advantage of git's distributed features would still have been able to share updates with each other.
Regardless of what protocols (‘git’ or otherwise) the IETF decides to use for document management, we should be using our own servers for this - not those belonging a third party. We need to be confident that this is going to survive the next recession :-) :-(
I have no objection to us doing this in-house. What I do object to is continued inaction. For example an organized pilot program taking advantage of an "outsourcing" opportunity like github could bring tremendous insight and valuable operational experience; which could be used to formulate a longer-term plan (whether that ultimately is in-house or not).
Doug