Microsoft appears to be blaming ICANN for the failure with Microft's
domain name servers (all located at the same place at Microsoft).
Microsoft has yet to pin down the cause of the DNS error. "It can
be a system or human error, but somebody could also have done this
intentionally," De Jonge said. "We don't manage the DNS ourselves,
it is a system controlled by the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers (ICANN) with worldwide replicas."
Microsoft gamers (users of www.zone.com) quickly came up with various
workarounds so they could continue playing. They were posting HOSTS.TXT
files on various gamer bulletin boards overnight. In particular
"Asheron's Call" had several problems during the last week, including
banning a number of users and rolling back experience points due to
a game bug.
Microsoft appears to be blaming ICANN for the failure with Microft's
domain name servers (all located at the same place at Microsoft).
Microsoft has yet to pin down the cause of the DNS error. "It can
be a system or human error, but somebody could also have done this
intentionally," De Jonge said. "We don't manage the DNS ourselves,
it is a system controlled by the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers (ICANN) with worldwide replicas."
What's with all the articles that say alot, but really tell us nothing?
DNS is not rocket science. The root-servers and gtld-servers I checked
all report the same set of NS records for microsoft.com:
These four systems are pingable, but don't seem to be answering DNS
requests.
So...are these NS records for microsoft.com incorrect (someone botched microsoft.com in the .com zone either by accident or malice)...or are they
correct and microsoft can't figure out how to run their DNS servers?
Either way, these addresses are Microsoft's (according to ARIN), so it
would appear Microsoft can't come up with a backup plan of some sort when
their DNS servers hit the fan, and they're spokespeople are basically
feeding the press a load of crap and misdirection?
Or maybe their DNS servers are under some sort of DoS attack flooding them
with so many DNS requests that they just can't handle the load and they
can't filter the attack because the source addresses are randomly forged
and they can't tell the difference between real requests and DoS requests?
Why bother writing crap news stories that really just say Microsoft is
down, but don't say anything about the cause?
If memory serves me right, Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> Microsoft appears to be blaming ICANN for the failure with Microft's
> domain name servers (all located at the same place at Microsoft).
>
> Microsoft has yet to pin down the cause of the DNS error. "It can
> be a system or human error, but somebody could also have done this
> intentionally," De Jonge said. "We don't manage the DNS ourselves,
s/ourselves,/ourselves, yet;/
> it is a system controlled by the Internet Corporation for Assigned
> Names and Numbers (ICANN) with worldwide replicas."
s/$/ With the fast-growing acceptance and enthusiastic reception of
Windows 2000 (tm), we expect that as deployments of this new
Flagship Operating System (tm) continue to accelerate, we will
be researching the administrative feasibility of managing the
DNS ourselves, via the breakthrough Active Directory (tm)
architecture built-in to Windows 2000 (tm). It is obvious that
although ICANN apparently has had (and continues to have, as
demonstrated by this incident) problems managing DNS, the
unparalleled power, stability, and low Total Cost of Ownership (tm)
features of Windows 2000 (tm) and its Active Directory (tm)
component and the ease-of-administration that they bring
can alleviate these issues once and for all. We already know
that many technical experts of the highest qualifications have
agreed that the benefits of Microsoft DNS (tm), powered by
Active Directory (tm) on Windows 2000 (tm) will elevate this
function to ever-higher levels of speed, ease-of-use, reliability,
and most importantly, compatibility with the overwhelming majority
of Windows (tm) computers, without question the most popular
Operating System environment (tm) for our Global Computing
Information Infrastructure (tm (tm)). /
Microsoft appears to be blaming ICANN for the failure with Microft's
domain name servers (all located at the same place at Microsoft).
Microsoft has yet to pin down the cause of the DNS error. "It can
be a system or human error, but somebody could also have done this
intentionally," De Jonge said. "We don't manage the DNS ourselves,
it is a system controlled by the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers (ICANN) with worldwide replicas."
Saying that it was the fault of anybody besides Microsoft is simply
not correct...a Perl script I use for diagnosing DNS problems reported
last night one root-server down (c), one gtld server (j) down, and all
but one of Microsoft's DNS servers down.
Asking a.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking b.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking c.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Error searching for 'www.msn.com' at 'c.root-servers.net': query timed out
Asking d.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking e.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking f.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking g.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking h.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking i.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking j.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking k.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking l.root-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking dns4.cp.msft.net about www.msn.com
Error searching for 'www.msn.com' at 'dns4.cp.msft.net': query timed out
Asking dns5.cp.msft.net about www.msn.com
Error searching for 'www.msn.com' at 'dns5.cp.msft.net': query timed out
Asking dns7.cp.msft.net about www.msn.com
Error searching for 'www.msn.com' at 'dns7.cp.msft.net': query timed out
Asking dns6.cp.msft.net about www.msn.com
Asking e.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking f.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking j.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Error searching for 'www.msn.com' at 'j.gtld-servers.net': query timed out
Asking k.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking a.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking m.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking g.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking c.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking i.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking b.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
Asking d.gtld-servers.net about www.msn.com
1 hosts [ 101/ 101 paths = 100.00% chance ] (dns6.cp.msft.net) reported: Sample path: a.root-servers.net -> dns6.cp.msft.net
www.msn.com. 0 IN A 207.46.179.134
www.msn.com. 0 IN A 207.46.179.143
www.msn.com. 0 IN A 207.46.179.71
www.msn.com. 0 IN A 207.46.185.138
www.msn.com. 0 IN A 207.46.185.140
www.msn.com. 0 IN A 207.46.209.218
www.msn.com. 0 IN A 207.46.209.243
i hope you're not laughing at the "most popular" bit. it just so happens
to be true (that there are more microsoft windows (tm) desktops
_and_ servers than anything else). something to think about...
> agreed that the benefits of Microsoft DNS (tm), powered by
oops. nowadays, it wouldn't be called "Microsoft DNS (tm)" (although
it sounds really nice, just kinda roollllllls off the tongue :);
instead if would be called "Microsoft Active DNS (tm)" (if you are
american, think about what
M A DNS
sounds like when you run-it-altogether :).
