mailing list archives
Re: GoDaddy.com shuts down entire data center?
From: Michael Loftis <mloftis () wgops com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:55:13 -0700
--On January 17, 2006 7:27:20 AM -0500 "Robert E.Seastrom"
<rs () seastrom com> wrote:
Now that Go Daddy has ensured that I'll never do business with them
(which is a shame; I liked certain lawsuits that they brought in the
past, but if being their customer means subscribing to their thought
police, count me out), I think it's time to carefully go over the
registration agreements with the registrars I use... never know when
someone will slip in something truly odious, and the argument that
none of them would be so crazy as to try it appears to be incorrect.
This thread gets less and less operational....however...I'm trying to keep
this in scope...I think this relates operationally because we all have and
enforce AUPs and ToS on our customer bases, both internal, and external.
We also have AUPs and ToS enforced on us, by business relationships and
Most ToS and AUP out there at the consumer level state basically the
service is worthless, that we can and will d/c you at will, without cause,
at our whim. Overzealous lawyering has made this a necessity. How much
any of these might or might not stand up in court, I have no clue. As you
get into the business world some ToS and AUP become more weighty, but far
more structured. Giving both sides clearer and well defined policies and
practices for responding to issues. Requiring notification, escalation,
I think what matters is the way that the AUPs are applied. This case...the
facts...don't match up. webhosting.info (not an authoritative source mind
you, but a datapoint) only sees ~150 hosts by this ISP. From what I
understand this number is from whois data with nameservers pointing to
theirs. Contrast this with mydyndns.org, google.com, ebay.com,
prioritycolo.com, wellsfargo.com (ok so this ones not that much more, at
~800), even sun.com has more domains listed. Those last two aren't even
'in the business' and they have more.
While they may have a large datacenter, I'm not even remotely sure that
this incident darkened the whole thing. It might've taken rDNS offline,
but that's far from darkening a whole datacenter. It sounds like another
WHTer puffing themselves up to being bigger than they are. They *must* be
small to let a *CUSTOMER* advocate for them to a third party! Nectartech
clearly knew about this and sanctioned it, and the person recording the
phone calls has pointed this out more than once.
There are no facts in this case either way, because it is really Go Daddy
against Nectartech. And Nectartech has a lot more reason to lie to make
itself look better in front of its customers. If their whole datacenter
went dark then it's some unrelated thing, or some really bad practice (such
as somehow establishing iBGP based on domain names maybe? hell I dunno).
I've seen so much utter BS spouted by a lot of the self proclaimed web
hosts on WHT that I'm not inclined to believe his side of the story any
more (or any less) because of it. Go Daddy has to my knowledge never been
draconian in applying their AUP (I think atleast some of us here would know
about it if so).