Since voipstutter thinks I should rename this blog “Skype Telephony”, I may as well feed into that image by noting that, per the Skype blog, Skype is now 4 years old.  I was not a user then, but judging by the screenshots of the client in 2003, it certainly has come a long way.  Whatever your opinions of Skype, it certainly has caused disruptions in the world of telcom… and it definitely does keep things interesting.  Congrats to the folks at Skype for hitting that birthday.

I noticed late last night that this weblog was added to the “Friends of Skype” blog roll that appears on the side of Skype’s blogs.  Thanks, Skype, for adding me… I certainly don’t mind the potential for others to find me. I do write about Skype, although often some of that writing can be critical.

I’ll note, too, that Skype’s list is actually a great compilation of the various bloggers out there who write about VoIP and collaboration.  Many of them would think of themselves as  (and accept the label of) “VoIP bloggers”, but others are from the larger blogging space (ex. Neville Hobson, Robert Scoble, Ross Mayfield).

At VoiceCon this week, one of the smaller booths that looked quite interested was that of OnState, a company launching a Live Chat capability for their call center solution based on Skype.  With my schedule at the show, I was unable to spend much time going through a demo, but what I did see looked quite interesting and I thought I might blog about it at some point.

However, it turns out that Jim Courtney over at Skype Journal has written a rather comprehensive post about OnState, with all sorts of links to prior articles, resources, etc.  Now, Jim wrote his story primarily to address issues he found in two other stories about OnState, but the result is a nice profile of what the offering is all about.

I would have to wonder, though, what kind of reaction OnState was getting at VoiceCon given how recently the massive Skype outage was.  Anyway, I would recommend checking out Jim’s article and the various links off of it.

In answer to the many questions raised after their announcement yesterday, Skype today issued a clarification FAQ: “The Microsoft connection clarified“.  For starters, they clearly stated that there was no connection to Microsoft:

1. Are we blaming Microsoft for what happened?

We don’t blame anyone but ourselves. The Microsoft Update patches were merely a catalyst — a trigger — for a series of events that led to the disruption of Skype, not the root cause of it. And Microsoft has been very helpful and supportive throughout.

The high number of post-update reboots affected Skype’s network resources. This caused a flood of log-in requests, which, combined with the lack of peer-to-peer network resources at the time, prompted a chain reaction that had a critical impact.

(more in the FAQ)

In response to the question that many of us raised (for instance, in my post yesterday) about “why this month’s update?”, Skype wrote:

2. What was different about this set of Microsoft update patches?

In short – there was nothing different about this set of Microsoft patches. During a joint call soon after problems were detected, Skype and Microsoft engineers went through the list of patches that had been pushed out. We ruled each one out as a possible cause for Skype’s problems. We also walked through the standard Windows Update process to understand it better and to ensure that nothing in the process had changed from the past (and nothing had). The Microsoft team was fantastic to work with, and after going through the potential causes, it appeared clearer than ever to us that our software’s P2P network management algorithm was not tuned to take into account a combination of high load and supernode rebooting.

The FAQ continues with answers to more questions.  All in all, a decent set of responses. 

Jim Courtney over at Skype Journal also offers his perspective on this statement.  I join Jim in thanking Skype PR for recognizing that their initial responses were insufficient.  I think a common thread in many responses to the initial communication was that we were looking for more transparency. Stuart Henshall, a very early Skype user and one of the founders of the Skype Journal, posted a good piece about communication and Skype:  “Outing Skype Communications“.  Well worth a read.

With that, we can probably wrap up the outage coverage…  it looks like Skype users are already back to using it.

P.S. Phil Wolff just put up a post “Skype and Crisis Communications 2.0” that looks like a good read…

Well, the official word is out from Skype and it can be summarized: the reboots from Microsoft patches triggered a previously-undetected condition and crashed out network. 

Skype PR staffer Villu Arak writes in “What happened on August 16“:

On Thursday, 16th August 2007, the Skype peer-to-peer network became unstable and suffered a critical disruption. The disruption was triggered by a massive restart of our users’ computers across the globe within a very short timeframe as they re-booted after receiving a routine set of patches through Windows Update.

The high number of restarts affected Skype’s network resources. This caused a flood of log-in requests, which, combined with the lack of peer-to-peer network resources, prompted a chain reaction that had a critical impact.

Okay… I can buy that this type of thing could trigger some kind of chain reaction, but I don’t understand why this month was different than any other month.  For.. what? two or three years now (more?) Microsoft patches have been coming out like clockwork on the second Tuesday of each month.  Each second Tuesday or Wednesday, the millions of computers set to auto-update do so.  All those zillions of computers restart automatically.  Each and every month.  What was so special about this August that was different from every other month?  Was the number or restarts in a short period of time really that much different from other months? Why? Is the issue that there are so many more Windows Skype users than in previous months and years? Was this just the so-called “tipping point” when there were enough Windows Skype users that the normal restarts triggered this chain reaction?

The issue has now been identified explicitly within Skype. We can confirm categorically that no malicious activities were attributed or that our users’ security was not, at any point, at risk.

In other words, it was not a DDoS by Russian hackers, as one rumor had it (which had actually already been dismissed by every security researcher who looked at the alleged exploit code).

This disruption was unprecedented in terms of its impact and scope. We would like to point out that very few technologies or communications networks today are guaranteed to operate without interruptions.

Fair enough statement – if you are looking at data or web technologies… but the PSTN, to which Skype would seem to like to be compared, is designed to operate without interruptions (or with as minimal as possible).  You know, there is this wee little market for “carrier-grade” equipment/software/etc. that is designed to be highly available without downtime.  If a carrier’s network were down for over 48 hours, there would be a zillion lawsuits, intense government inquiries and more.  The carriers that make up what we call the “PSTN” put an incredible effort into ensuring availability.  If Skype wants to play in that game, they have to be ready to play at the same level.

Skype has now identified and already introduced a number of improvements to its software to ensure that our users will not be similarly affected in the unlikely possibility of this combination of events recurring.

Good. We would expect that.

I appreciate that Skype has been as communicative as they have through their blog and heartbeat site.  Thank you, Skype, for communicating – and leaving the comments open.  However, to me the information provided today is still lacking one key piece:

Why were the mass restarts associated with the August 2007 Microsoft updates different from the mass restarts associated with any other month’s Microsoft updates?