[lxgr]

> Whatever multi-home means, why can't there just be one service provider that does that?

Many of these outages are due to pushing broken artifacts or configuration to production.

A single provider can pretty easily offer geographic or network topological redundancy, but administrative and/or technological independence is pretty hard to achieve in a single company.

[orblivion]

I mean, I guess what I'm saying is that in theory a single provider could purposely keep two different departments that manage their own artifacts independently.

[topranks]

Records have to be kept in sync.

If one dept deletes a record and the other doesn’t, how do you decide who’s right?

You could add a third dept that gives them both orders, but now that third dept is a single point of failure.

[orblivion]

If I were a customer of two different companies for the sake of redundancy, wouldn't I have that same challenge? I could be my own point of failure.

Though, I suppose if I'm responsible for it, I fix it faster for myself.

[JetSpiegel]

In this particular case, the Akamai clients did not push broken artifacts, so sounds like at least this particular instance would be avoided.

[knute]

I believe EasyDNS can automatically push DNS settings to Route53 to host DNS in AWS. Doesn't protect you from fat-fingering a change, but you should be resilient to either EasyDNS or Route53 going down.

https://kb.easydns.com/knowledge/easyroute53/