Slashdot Mirror
MSFT thanks Linux Programmer for paying $35 Fee
Quite a number of people have been writing recently in regards to the recent Hotmail outage. As we reported before, a Linux programmer wanted to get his mail - and paid the $35 fee to renew their domain registration. News.com has picked up the news story, complete with thanks from MSFT to Mr. Michael Chaney.
http://slashdot.org/comm ents.pl?sid=99/12/25/114201&cid=90
That's not the only thing a Linux programmer could fix over at Microsoft.
Sheepdot: Open Source good, Closed Source baaaaaaad!
Since he paid for the domain registration, wouldnt he have a final say on the domain? If he refuses to accept any payment microsoft made ($35), wouldnt he be the owner of this domain? And have a final say as to where it should point?
:)
I believe M$ owes this dude more than $35. A personal check from BillG would be most appericated.
--
yet another example of how helpful linux and other free software users/developers/admins can be compared to their windows counterparts.
would a windows person think to pay for linux.com's domain? (or other linux related domains)
US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
Do you think Micro$oft would have given Linux.com back for $35? I think not. I'm just glad he's decent enough not to try to squat the site and inconvenience all those hotmail users (not really a good PR move).
F.O.Dobbs
ps- a redirect to www.hotmale.com would have been interesting though...
I bet you they still wouldn't buy back an OEM copy of Windows from him if he wanted Linux on a name brand PC.
I find it rather amusing that one linux progammer managed to beat out an entire team of M$ employees in diagnosing and fixing a problem. It only adds to it that the problem was that M$ forget to pay a #$35 dollar fee.
I'm glad that he is enjoying his fifteen minutes of fame. For $35 dollars, he got a lot of attention for doing something simple, and at no long term cost to him.
However, at the end, he indicates that he would like them to consider the advertising revenue that they saved by his registering it.
I don't know if that is his actual statement or a journalist trying to make the story more controversial, but if he really feels that way, it's kinda silly. He wanted to get his mail, he paid their registration fee, and they are paying him pack.
They also figured out the problem, he just beat them to it. While I'm certain that this administrative slight is really embarassing to Microsoft, the whole situation is silly.
This wasn't a win for the community. This was a silly situation to happen and a potential PR mess. I'm glad that it was resolved, but this is getting blown out of proportion.
Alex
As it may seem that Microsoft has everything to lose from this scenario, to the consumer, they redeemed themselves by paying back Mr. Chaney.
Look at it this way: How have you heard Linux described in the press? "Linux, an alternative to Microsoft's Windows Operating System..." is one of the many incantations of the phrase. Most of the television watching, Time magazine reading public sees "alternative" == "competitor". Meaning, financial competitor, because that's what people see - money.
Now, what people see the Hotmail/Passport situation as being is that some guy from the Linux camp gave money to their worst enemy. Sure, for the most part it looks bad for Microsoft. But Microsoft redeems themselves immediately in the eyes of the consumer by giving that money back.
All in all, approximately 26 Million people couldn't access their e-mail for a few hours and everything else is normal to most people. Microsoft wasn't hurt too badly by this situation when you think about it.
You should never take life too seriously - You'll never get out of it alive.
You know you're a monopoly when you have the brass balls to piss off a giant like Microsoft over a stupid $35 monthly fee. This is just typical of the arrogance that is Network Solutions.
. . . "I didn't get to be the richest guy in the world by writing a bunch of big checks to people". (Granted, he only said it in an episode of the Simpsons).
IMHO he did do something nice just for its own sake.
Give it a rest.
"Cause there's 40 different shades of black, so many fortresses and ways to attack, so why you complainin'?"
Whatever happened to doing something nice just for its own sake?
:-)
It went out the window along with "I'll write programs for free, give out the source, and people will just pay me to code because they know I code well."
The guy makes a good-faith effort to restore service to some company (who cares which one, really?) because he values the service they provide.
:)
It's mature, it's unselfish, it's not what I'd have expected from many of the more childish posters I've seen reply so far.
THIS makes me proud to be a Linux user. If we could all be as mature, maybe I wouldn't mind being lumped in a "community" with the rest of you so much.
If I had to guess, I'd bet that the comment about "deserving" more because he did them a favor was probably something just said idly, or even in jest, that the reporter seized on... they do have a tendency to do that in the news, to add a twist to a story. Never say something you don't want quoted in front of a reporter, eh?
"He who breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom." --Gandalf the Grey
Don't be such a butthead. Read his original post.
"Merry Christmas, Microsoft." It appears that he did it to be nice, and feels (rightly) that this service was worth more to MSFT than $35. It's not like he hijacked the domain and held them for ransom.
What have you done lately for someone else who you don't necessarily like, spontaneously and gently?
Remember that what's inside of you doesn't matter because nobody can see it.
a Linux programmer save a Microsoft service running BSD... The world is smaller that you realize
Some posts are implying that after having paid for passport.com, that Chaney owned it.
I don't see how that is true.
Just paying for it doesn't change or give you the authority to change any of the contact or DNS information.
What I wonder is what the passport.com internic records looked like before Dec 27. That is, was the Billing Contact Carolyn Gudmundson...or was it someone else who may no longer work at MS?
Doug ---- Co-host of Ghostly Talk
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
If I were him I'd call up my credit card company and tell them to cancel payment. :) That might cause the server to be held up in another fiasco while they sort out Internic trying to charge late fees as well as handling cancellation fees.
Joseph Elwell.
I read the article and it seemed not to say that he got paid back yet, nor did it say that the amount he got paid back was only $35.
The guy says he'll frame the check "unless it's a huge amount."
Why would he say that? My guess is, he's not going to see a dime. What's he going to do? Sue Microsoft?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
http://www.doublewide.net/passport.htm
But seriously, this guy could've charged MS a LOT more than $35 to get it back...
Get WHAT back? He didn't have anything that belonged to them.
You seem to think that using the automated payment system at NSI actually transfered the domain to the guy that paid. It didn't, it doesn't. A credit card is a credit card. I could walk into the phone company and pay your bill, that doesn't mean when people call you my phone will ring, and it doesn't change the name on next months bill either.
So how do you figure he could have held out for 5 figures? About all he could do is ask politely for his $35.
======
"Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16
Sacred cows make the best burgers.
If memory serves me right, when M$ came down and helped out apple, the "community" response was bloody M$, don't stick your wallet where it isn't wanted. Now... when a linux person does it for M$, the response is "Look, we saved megacorp from drowning, aren't we swell". Irony?
-I just work here... how am I supposed to know?
It's not like he called a press conference, or something like that. The press is coming to him to get his side of the story. Would you prefer a mumbled "no comment" as he shuffles back to his pizza, Jolt, and Perl scripts? :-)
And that "cut of the revenue" comment at the end reeks of pseudo-journalistic spin. I'd bet that comment was a joke taken out of context.
Keith Russell
OS != Religion
This sig intentionally left blank.
...does anyone with out the proper account information pay for a domain name they don't own.. Does this mean I can go pay for the renewal of ibm.com if I felt like it? or some one pay for my domains? Isn't this a security issue also? last time I messed with this kinda stuff I needed to have a working e-mail address to modify and verify changes. hmmmmmmmmmm
-- Jason...
that because a Linux user paid for the domain that it now be called GNU/Hotmail, because while Hotmail is the operational part, without GNU it would not be complete.
I doubt that his intentions were purely altruistic (genuflects) SIC? or greedy. It was probably done in jest so don't get bent out of shape, just laugh.
Hypothetically, anything hypothetical is possible.
I don't know. To be honest, having read his original post (he posted to /. when he paid the thing), I think it was more done to be funny. Why not? They're dumbasses, it's only 35 bucks, hell - I'd have paid for it if I'd been in that position. Would've been funny. *grin*
Yes, it was a nice thing to do, simple as that. It was also very amusing. And made for an amusing conversation on slashdot when he did it, and again later (though I don't think he could have realized that he would get actual _press_ for that).
Having done it, I would also be wondering if they could pay more than 35 bucks. He isn't asking for it, he isn't pushing for it even. He commented that it would be nice, but he seems to understand that it isn't likely, especially knowing the greed in ms. So? Seems like just another average joe to me, who happened to notice the problem and do something about it, and get amused by his own actions. Nothing major, and certainly not greedy.
A greedy person would have tried to transfer ownership, or something like that. I see no indication that he even considered that, it seems more like a 'heh, I fixed their screwup for em, too bad they can't fix themselves' sort of thing.
-Elthia
Many large corporations are so inefficient that they can't pay their bills in a timely fashion. This hurts their suppliers unfairly, who quite logically will resort to automatic, pre-programmed service cancellations. I've seen it numerous times, and from the outside this certainly looks like another case.
-----------
"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."
Here is the main part of a letter I wrote earlier with some suggestions for improvements:
A recent article ("Domain Winner Loses Big") on wired.com at
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,32974, 00.html
was heavily discussed/ranted-about on slashdot.org at
http://slashdot.org/articles/99/12/11/1155244.sh tml
and left me with a distinct impression that there are some real problems with the registration system, to wit:
(1) There does not seem to be a reliable way to establish provable priority of a claim to a name, i.e., that one was first in the first come first serve process. And (1a) The act of checking a name for prior registration exposes the name to the risk of being misappropriated if the link is not secure or the registrar is unscrupulous.
I believe the way to solve this is to separate the creation of a proof of first claim from the business of the various registrar authorities.
As it stands, the registration businesses apparently can make mistakes (possibly even on purpose, some seem to suspect) which can make a domain name wind up unfairly in the wrong hands, and point to their disclaimers and say, "too bad."
A possibility would be to have ICANN run one or more entirely automatic secure and certifiably trustable servers synchronized with UTC time (see http://www.time.gov/ ) -- whose only purpose would be automatically to return time-stamped, digitally signed copies of messages sent to them by secure web form. This is simple and quick, and does not involve searching a database. If there were a unique server for each g/ccTLD, they wouldn't even have to be that well synchronized (solves the problem of sub-second ties, for which you probably would need need a tie-breaking rule otherwise).
You would enter your identification and the domain name you were _trying_ to claim, and you'd get a certificate back, which would be the proof of your time-priority in case of duplicate names. There would be three business days to complete a registration using any of the competing registration businesses, which would be bound to respect the certificate (whose signature they could independently verify).
You would be protected, because you would no longer be dependent on the performance or reliability of any particular registration business. The name could not be misappropriated, because it passed securely to the time-stamping server, and if your first choice registrar could not return legally binding proof that they had received and processed your application into pending status (again probably a transaction record forwarded through an official time stamping server), then you could go to another registrar with no risk to your claim, even from an unscrupulous registrar that as it stands now could potentially put you off with some operational delay excuse and pass the name to a cybersquatter for registration via another channnel.
Of course if the name had already been completely registered, or had a prior pending application, your application would be rejected with no charge (and you could verify that you lost fair and square). At the end of the three days, your pending status would change to completed (unless someone else in the meantime submitted an application with an earlier time stamp), and your credit card could be charged.
This would also create a competitive incentive towards good service.
(2) The transfer of ownership/title to an existing domain seems vulnerable to equipment or procedural errors or registrar misconduct. The cited discussion suggests that title tranfer was not reliably under control of the owner.
Domain name title/ownership transfer must be totally atomic and have no possibility of falling into unregistered status without the owner's informed consent. Registering businesses should not have the authority to change the status of a registered domain name except by due process of expiration or as explicitly authorized by the owner. The burden of proof of authorization must be on the registrar, and any operational or equipment error on their part should not have legally binding consequences on the status of the domain name.
The key is to design a sequence of verifiable transactions that guarantee execution of the owner's intent, even with a bad service apple in the barrel.
This is just what I've thought since reading the discussions, so there may be some holes in the above, or better ways to achieve the guarantees, but I believe some technical implementation changes could make for better legal protections in registering and transferring domain names.
Thanks for reading.
Regards,
Bengt Richter
Anyway, my point was that superlative modifiers are frequently over-used on this forum. Go ahead and moderate me down.
-jwb
\subject.
--
It's October 6th. Where's W2K? Over the horizon again, eh?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
There is a big difference between the thanks he has earned from the Hotmail users and from Microsoft. He did something nice for the other users of Hotmail. Microsoft on the other hand, is a corporation. It cannot be grateful. Gratitude is a feeling. Perhaps he should tell them that he really wanted to see something in a red hat for Christmas.
I don't mean this to suggest that corporations should be taken advantage of, defrauded or such. But the only gratitude they can show is that of the people they represent: share holders, employees or customers. The share holders and customers should be grateful in this particular case. I suspect that there are some employees who are not grateful at all.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
I don't know about you but I wouldn't subject even Microsoft to the horror of a confused Network Solutions :)
Why is there such need to gloat about Microsft's mistakes? Does pointing them out make Linux or whatever operating system you use better?
In the end, Chaney did a good turn and set a good example. Enough said.
Network Solutions does NOT send lots of warnings by paper and email. My domain bill was due on Oct 31 and I received exactly one piece of correspondence on this, an email on Oct. 6, before they cut me off at the same time as passport.com.
This is a point that is being left out of the coverage of this: Microsoft screwed up, possibly they didn't get the bill, possibly because they are human. (do you seriously think that the person responsible at Microsoft is going to say, "let's hold off on paying passport.com"?) But why in the earth did Network Solutions pick Dec. 23/24 as the day to cut off the DNS service of outstanding invoices for the last few months? What a poorly timed move that was. And I guarantee they did not email people with outstanding invoices beforehand, as I was one of those people. (I am admin, tech, zone, and billing contact for my domain).
I consult for a large telecom company that hosts thousands of domains so I get to see a good sample of the problem people have with Network Solutions. Generally speaking they send out plenty of notice before putting a domain on hold. [Hey, don't get me wrong, I really hate dealing with Network Solutions, but generally the problems I have with them are getting updates done.]
I've seen one other case where a large ISP neglected to pay for an important domain. In that case it was simply that those responible for paying where not techies (because in large organizations techies don't pay the bills, the finance department does) and considered a US$35 bill unimportant; they willfully neglected to pay. I suspect the same thing happened with passport.com. I'd bet that some accountant recieved the invoice but couldn't find anyone who could tell him who "network solutions" is and said to himself, "Well, I'm not going to pay a $35 invoice that I can't account for."
I've seen many cases with small organizations where domains didn't get paid for because the accountant was expecting an invoice for "InterNIC" and didn't know that "Network Solutions" was the Internet (in days gone by there were the same organization).
Nope... not necesary. They just upgraded them an hour ago it seems. :-)
Restating the obvious since nineteen aught five.
Errm, the name passport.com was not taken by anybody at the time he paid. He could have registered the name with any competitor of networkdelutions.com. Just rewriting all the scripts would have cost Microsoft a lot of money, not to mention the problems hotmail users would have experienced during that time.
Just my prospective...
This just goes to show that Linux people (No nessisarly advocates or zellots but the general community) want what they want and will move heven and earth to get it.. woe be it to anyone who gets in there way...
Microsoft has become the bad guy becouse the simply want everyone to use there products. They are ok but they aren't perfict and don't work for everyone. As a result Microsoft puts themselfs in direct obstruction of anyone who wants to do something Windows can not handle very well.
Microsoft has basicly the made themselfs into the techo unmovable object and Linux people have become the techno illresisable force... and they colide often...
But when a Linux programmer wants his e-mail.. and it's on Microsofts server.. and all thats stopping him is a domain name... Not even a second thought... it is done.. It matters not that it's Microsoft he helpped... He wants his e-mail and he will get his e-mail...
As for Microsoft.. far from the vile evil overlords we make them out to be.. Do whats right and thank him for his efforts..
It probably has a few Microsoft people scratching there heads.. Why would someone do something like this? More so why would a LINUX programmer help Microsoft?
The answer is simple... Microsoft is the evil bad guy as long as they stand in the way... Anyone can become evil... just try and stop the Linux community from doing something... you'll be come evil.. and very injured....
Why arn't other obstructive companys on the communitys "Evil" list? Simply becouse they don't get in the way of the Linux community.. they obstruct others...
Many obstructionists really deserve the "Evil" title.. Microsoft is better labled "Misguided".. misguided in the idea that this is the way to do busness..
Right or wrong asside things are changing and Microsoft has put themselfs in the way of that change.. Thats just an unwise busness move. At this point IF they did change most people would be wondering what Microsoft is up to.. They let themselfs be "evil" for far to long...
But this dose show that if Microsoft could show they are sereous and put themselfs in the direction of helpping the Linux community they could be accepted into the fold...
It also shows that if Microsoft belived helpping the Linux community was a good thing they'd do it..
Finnaly.. The Linux community is not as selfless as they come off.. They just think in bigger terms... Not "I" want it... "WE" want it.. and "WE" move in mass to get it... If "I" want something "I" find others who also want it and "WE" get it.. togeather.. as a community.. Selfishly helpping others achive the goals "WE" wish to achive...
I don't actually exist.
Specifically, you will note that the Billing Contact for PASSPORT.COM is a person.
Billing Contact: Gudmundson, Carolyn (CG6635) carolyng@MICROSOFT.COM +1 (425) 882-8080 (FAX) +1 (425) 936-7329
Now, compare that to most other domains used by M$oft. It is often the case, that people that are part of big business FORGET that there are some very tedious details on the InterNET.
Microsoft-Internic Billing Issues (MDB-ORG) msnbill@MICROSOFT.COM 425 882 8080
This is the proper use of a ROLE. A sure fire way to screw something up is to let a SINGLE person be a Billing Contact. By far the best practice is to use a ROLE that has a email address that gets sent to several people. Since you never know who might be on a vacation or might blow away their inbox.
So I would recommend that Microsoft go here: http://www.networksolutions.co m/makechanges/reports/
Actually, a good natured Linux user could probably do this as well for them. :) All you need it the information contained in the whois lookup.
The reason this is important is that Gudmundson, Carolyn (CG6635) carolyng@MICROSOFT.COM probably hasn't paid many other things as well. Why? This person might not even WORK for microsoft now...
Think this can't happen? Think again. Her manager should have known or someone should have known but apparently nobody did or there was a billing error/oversite. Oh, but wait... what if her manager is gone TOO???
Repeat again: Think it can't happen? Thing again.
When you use a domain name make sure you put a TEAM in charge with a leader vs. a single point of failure. Even a rank newbie working for an ISP knows this much. I expect that Gudmundson, Carolyn (CG6635) carolyng@MICROSOFT.COM was on vacation or called in rich[sick].
Aren't you glad you don't work in this persons office?
http://www.mp3.com/fudge/
http://fudge.org
Anyway, if you look at the original Slashdot thread, he didn't expect this to turn into a big media thing. He just posted a comment along the lines of "Hey, I just paid it for them. Here's the reciept."
--
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
This is just what Microsoft needs, more bad PR. What surprises me is that they forgot to pay the InterNIC fee for a domain that handles all of their logins to places like Hotmail, MoneyCentral, etc. I hope that Microsoft gets the clue this time, and I would hope that the person who is in charge of domain registration there gets reprimanded as well. I just mentioned this story to my brother (who is a Microsoft employee in MoneyCentral), and he just rolled his eyes. As mentioned, since Passport handles the logins for MoneyCentral, my brother has already said that once he heads back to Seattle, he's planning on inquiring about this.
Really nice of that guy to pay for the domain registration though. I hope Microsoft gives him the thanks he deserves for helping to correct yet another Microsoft blunder.
--
The real Raunchola isn't cool enough to have any imposters
Not really, he didn't take anything away. It would be more accurate to say "I found your check book outside. You should be more careful. By the way, I balanced it for you, mailed off a check to your bank with the stub from the Repossession notice that was stuck in the check book, rotated your tires and detailed your car. I put the Pine air freshener instead of the Jasmine, since it is Christmas. Say, that's a odd looking wart on your neck, let me do a quick biopsy...."
The guy was a Good Samaritan on Christmas morning to help out the online community that would be impacted by this that day. Give the guy a break.
Personally, I'd probably do the same thing if it came my way just for the entertainment factor!
The name passport.com was free for the taking at several registrars mentioned at CORE.
This speaks far more about the lousy current condition of the various whois systems than it does to the actual availability of the domain. NSI had a record on passport.com because they are the registry for the domain. Those other registries have simply not fixed thier whois processes to deal with the "decentralized" system yet. You cannot rely at this time on whois to tell you if a domain is available. Go to NSI and try fuckingsucks.net, and it will tell you it is 'inappropriate'. But write a script that parses the returned data for the correct whois server (instead of mucking about searching for the fuckword so you can lecture the user about propriety) then query THAT whois server, and you get the correct result:
Whois Server: whois.corenic.net
Geoff Cummins (template COCO-6284) CORE-28
Fun
P.O. Box 950652
Mission Hills, CA 91395 USA
Domain Name: fuckingsucks.net
Status: production
Admin Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Geoff Cummins (COCO-6284) geoff@hawky.net
+1 8188942773
CORE Registrar: CORE-28
Record last modified: 1999-12-10 02:56:08 MET by CORE-28
Record created: 1999-08-05 06:17:25 MET by CORE-28
Domain servers in listed order:
ns1.vmrdesigns.com 209.126.135.10
ns2.vmrdesigns.com 209.126.135.5
curtis.curtisfong.org 206.111.86.96
You cannot rely on the broken scripts at these registries to tell the truth. Interestingly, *I* learned how to do this from reading a Slashdot article a few weeks ago, and implemented it on a web form using a few lines of PHP. That these registries still cannot be bothered to fix this worries me. There may be several up and coming future NSI's out there. *shudder*
======
"Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16
Sacred cows make the best burgers.