SM: I certainly agree that in incidents like this, a timely notification is in order. (Of course to the extent that the outage itself allows us to do that. Sometimes the outage or the queue that has built up during the outage delays sending a notification.)
And we normally do send notifications; in this case circumstances (such as people being out sick) conspired to delay sending the notification out. But it did eventually go out, and I'd like to thank Glen, Steve, and the team for dealing with the issue and restoring the service. Based on this experience, we should be able to make notifications faster on future incidents. Also, I wanted to bring up a point about what to do if you see a problem. Glen already mentioned ietf-act...@ietf.org. This is what you should normally use, if you see a problem. There has been a couple of incidents where this address would not have worked, such as when the entire connectivity to the IETF system is down. Obviously, the IAOC and AMS have worked hard to make sure this does not happen, and we are about to make another update soon that will significantly reduce the risk of site-wide problems. We think it would have prevented yesterday's problem, too. But should you find a situation where the IETF site is unreachable, IAOC and IESG members have a way to alert the staff. Please contact your nearest IESG/IAOC member to bring the issue to their attention. For instance, you can contact me at this e-mail address or jariar...@jabber.org/jari.ar...@gmail.com with instant messaging. And since we are spread around the world, we often have noticed the problem already. In yesterday's incident, Pete Resnick noticed the problem and contacted AMS - thanks Pete! Jari
