Microsoft spokesperson blames ICANN

Sorry, Jim; I think it's not that much of a stretch. They said that
(a) it's a DNS problem, (b) they don't understand the cause, but (c)
they don't manage the DNS, ICANN does. OK -- the problem is therefore
in a piece they don't manage, so they're not at fault. But ICANN
*does* manage it (or so the direct quote says). There's a decent
implication there that the manager is at fault, though not (of course)
a direct statement. I would also note that the article quotes De Jonge
as saying "The *Internet's* Domain Name System (DNS) does does not return
the correct response when it is queried for a Microsoft Web site"
[emphasis added]. In other words, it's not *Microsoft's* DNS servers,
it's the "Internet's".

I know you worked hard on this, and I understand that at the time of
this article, very little was understood about the root cause. (And
I'm not at all surprised to hear that many different things
contributed.) But that paragraph (and the additional sentence I
quoted) are, at best, misleading, and can easily be read in the way
that Sean read it. Maybe the guy was tired, maybe there was a language
barrier, maybe the reporter misunderstood something (though there's a
lot less scope for that in direct quotations). I read it the same way
that Sean did.

    --Steve Bellovin,

if icann munged one or more root servers, then icann would be at (partial
or total) fault. microsoft's authoritative nameservers are managed
by microsoft. as is pointed out below [ snipped ], if the "internet's"
name servers were at fault, then it's true that microsoft "doesn't manage
the DNS". if microsoft's nameservers were (directly or indirectly)
at fault, then (c) would be irrelevant and misleading. my take (and
i am trying to stay unbiased) is that the latter is pretty much clearly
correlating with the symptoms seen 'net-wide, so far, and not the former.
that is, (a), (b), and "(c) we manage the portion of our DNS that seems
to be the broken portion".