Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

State Dept E-mail Crash After "Reply-All" Storm

Posted by timothy on from the forward-this-story-to-all-your-friends-in-triplicate dept.

twistah writes "It seems that a recent 'reply-all storm' at the State Department caused the entire e-mail infrastructure to crash. A notice sent to all State Department employees warned of disciplinary actions which will be taken if users 'reply-all' to lists with a large amount of users. Apparently, the problem was compounded by not only angry replies asking to be taken off the errant list, but by the e-mail recall function, which generated further e-mail traffic. One has to wonder if capacity planning was performed correctly — should an e-mail system be able to handle this type of traffic, or is it an unreasonable task for even the best system?"

6 of 384 comments (clear)

  1. Bedlam... by ghostis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2004/04/08/109626.aspx

    Again...

    -Ghostis

    --


    Computer Science is all about trying to find the right wrench to bang in the right screw. -T.Cumbo?
    1. Re:Bedlam... by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So you know enough about Exchange to know the Registry Key for configuring a max recipient count, but not enough to think that they were using DLs, which count as one recipient?

  2. sigh by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What an irony that they decided to mass mail when they've warned their employees not to do so. What they should have done if they were concerned about their load [which evidently they should have] was to warn their employees in blocks, perhaps 10% at a time with space between to take care of the massive response... However, judging by the nature of their work [it is the state department after all] I don't believe it unreasonable that there could be events in their future requiring such mass mailings again and having the whole system crash under the load would be no doubt very bad in emergencies.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  3. Two questions: by drolli · · Score: 4, Interesting

    a) Maintaining large list by copying all recipients into the hrader is a fucked up idea at best (because there is no way this list will be kept updated), and a informaiton leak at worst (because somebody eralier on a non-updated list may get information which he should not get - e.g. former employees). Why do governmental institutions still us it?

    b) Why in the world do modern e-mail clients still allow reply all to hundreds of recipients without an additional safety question. I would expect my program would warn me before sending an emails to thousand people.
     

  4. Re:And in other news... by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And in even further news, corporations are not perfect.

    I take it you're not familiar with how enterprises plan. They plan for regular load, not aberrant once-in-a-blue-moon load. This is bog standard behavior for a system responding to people doing stupid things. If you think this is restricted to the US government, you've never worked in corporate IT.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  5. In the same vein... by microcars · · Score: 4, Interesting

    and of course, off-topic from TFA, I signed up with a Product Testing Place. They email me once every six months and see if I want to test some new gadget or something and I get paid $75.

    I signed a confidentiality agreement with them.
    I am not allowed to discuss ANYTHING about the product or reveal I am testing it or anything. I was never there, I am nobody.

    Last year I got an email - From The President of The Testing Company - personally thanking me for all the help in the last year.
    He also thanked everyone else who "helped" last year as well and I could see who they were because apparently the President (or the secretary) just put all our emails into the TO: field and let it fly.
    Lots of Identifiable people on the list because they used their WORK email, like john.doe@largecorporation.com So it was easy to see who else was part of that big Butt Plug testing program.

    I did a REPLY to ONLY the President and laid into him about the confidentiality agreement and told him if he didn't know how to use email to stay away from the computer.

    Later that day we all got another email from the President, this time apologizing for revealing all our personal emails, never happen again etc etc. And apparently he figured out how to use BCC!

    So yelling at someone does seem to work to change behaviour.
    Also- this is a dupe comment, I posted this once before on Slashdot someplace, but since this is Slashdot I didn't think a dupe would be a problem.

    --
    I like microcars