Unfortunately, telling end users to disable a default setting is
rather difficult these days.
Not if it's done the right way using the right language.
For instance...
Did you realize that your computer is probably wasting
precious bandwidth and slowing down your Internet
I think the solution is for those DNS operators affected who have not
signed an EULA for the system that is hammering their DNS to sue Micr0$0ft
for the costs incurred in dealing with the issue. Making Micr0$0ft
play legal whack-a-mole may be the only strategy with a chance of success
here.
(I
The difference is that Netgear admitted responsibility and worked with
UW to cope with the issue. Further, Netgear has funded UW in it's
cleanup efforts and generally stepped up to the plate. As much as I don't
care for Netgear's products, they did show decent corporate responsibility
when UW
It reminds me of the Netgear and U of Wisconsin time server SNAFU.
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~plonka/netgear-sntp/
The difference is that Netgear admitted responsibility and worked with
UW to cope with the issue. Further, Netgear has funded UW in it's
cleanup efforts and generally stepped up to
Micahel,
I think class action is a less effective approach here. Micr0$0ft has
vast resources ready to take on any large single lawsuit and make it a very
expensive and resource intensive process for their opposition. On the other
hand, with a low (around $25 last I looked) filing fee and
Original Message -
From: Owen DeLong [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: Annoying dynamic DNS updates (was Re: someone from attbi please
contact me ...)
Think about Micr0$0ft trying to fight off thousands
Back in beta days, the official explanation given was that the DNS
updating was a value add and that it would never be disabled as
a default as a courtesy to corporate customers. Furthermore, MSFT
folks have repeatedly said that the workaround is to simply configure
your nameserver to
: Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2003 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: Annoying dynamic DNS updates (was Re: someone from attbi please
contact me ...)
Back in beta days, the official explanation given was that the DNS
updating was a value add
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Bruns
Sent: September 28, 2003 6:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Paul Vixie
Subject: Re: Annoying dynamic DNS updates (was Re: someone
from attbi please contact me ...)
How about just
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, Paul Vixie wrote:
noc@ and abuse@ are ignoring me as usual, so i'm spamming nanog@ in
hopes of locating attbi clue. i need somebody who can educate one of
your customers who is dns-updating me.
ATT Broadband was sold to Comcast a while ago. There is no more attbi
clue.
-
From: Sean Donelan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 7:30 PM
Subject: Annoying dynamic DNS updates (was Re: someone from attbi please
contact me ...)
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, Paul Vixie wrote:
noc@ and abuse@ are ignoring me as usual, so i'm
11 matches
Mail list logo
