[westernmostcoy]

Take a moment to look at the construction of this report.

There is no easily readable timeline. It is not discoverable from anywhere outside of social media or directly searching for it. As far as I know, customers were not emailed about this - I certainly wasn't.

You're an important business, AWS. Burying outage retrospectives and live service health data is what I expect from a much smaller shop, not the leader in cloud computing. We should all demand better.

[perlgeek]

Also notably missing is the "we will automatically refund all affected customers" line that we'd expect from somebody who wants to provide excellent service.

A graphical illustration of the service dependencies they were talking about would have been nice as well.

[CephalopodMD]

I mean, it's in the SLA that they have to refund 10% for the billing period IIRC.

[el_benhameen]

If you request it and provide evidence that they find compelling.

To receive a Service Credit, you must submit a claim by opening a case in the AWS Support Center. To be eligible, the credit request must be received by us by the end of the second billing cycle after which the incident occurred and must include:

the words “SLA Credit Request” in the subject line; the dates and times of each incident of non-zero Error Rates that you are claiming; and your request logs that document the errors and corroborate your claimed outage (any confidential or sensitive information in these logs should be removed or replaced with asterisks). If the Monthly Uptime Percentage applicable to the month of such request is confirmed by us and is less than the applicable Service Commitment, then we will issue the Service Credit to you within one billing cycle following the month in which your request is confirmed by us. Your failure to provide the request and other information as required above will disqualify you from receiving a Service Credit."

[dsl]

> provide evidence that they find compelling

A link to their tweet about the status page not working because the building was burning down around it seems compelling.

[Eiriksmal]

Interesting observation. Maybe the answer is it that a behemoth like AWS does this because they _can_ get away with it. In contrast to AWS's cascading failures, the GitLab outage was a mere blip. Because they are several orders of magnitude smaller than Amazon, however, they had to be painfully transparent during their actual restore operations and in the post-moterm.

AWS has more implicit trust that this won't happen again, since they've never (I think?) had something like this happen, so just a few lines about fixing the tool that let all the nodes shutdown is enough to restore confidence.

[vorpalhex]

Emails seem to be going out. I got one a while ago. I suspect this was an initial response geared towards the general audience and a more specific technical response will be forthcoming.

[mauriciob]

It is now indexed by Google, at least. Doesn't look like they are actively trying to hide it.