back to article Xbox One site belly-up in global Microsoft cloud catastrophe

Last time Microsoft's Azure cloud went down, it was a sub-component that flaked out globally, and the time before that it was a certificate problem – now the service is inaccessible again, along with its status page. And the wobble has taken down the Xbox.com website on the Xbox One worldwide launch day. Other services having …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Trollface

    Groan

    When will MS learn to use a decent server OS and not a scaled up single user, single microprocessor OS.

    1. Brandon Paddock

      Re: Groan

      Were you being intentionally ironic?

      (NT has always been a multi-user multi-threaded OS since day 1, unlike, say, Linux which had such things bolted on later in life).

      1. Adam 1

        Re: Groan

        If only el reg had some sort of icon that could indicate whether a postshould be taken literally. :)

      2. joeldillon

        Re: Groan

        I highly doubt Linux had multiuser support bolted on in any meaningful sense of 'later'. It's a Unix.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Groan

        "NT has always been a multi-user multi-threaded OS since day 1, unlike, say, Linux which had such things bolted on later in life)."

        Err, what? Linux was multi user and multi process from day 1. Threads came along later but then when you have multi process multi threading is a nice to have rather than an essential. Remind me - can Windows fork() processes yet? No, didn't think so.

        As for NT multi user - sure , so long as you don't want more than 1 user logged on at the same time it was "multi" user. ie - fucking useless.

        1. Spoonsinger

          Re: can Windows fork() processes yet?

          Not entirely sure why you would want to "fork" a process under NT. Yes you can execute out to one, (with all the overhead that uses), but generally a thread or two inside the same process will suffice.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: can Windows fork() processes yet?

            "Not entirely sure why you would want to "fork" a process under NT. Yes you can execute out to one, (with all the overhead that uses), but generally a thread or two inside the same process will suffice."

            If you don't understand the pros and cons of mult process vs multi threaded programming then I suggest you go and read up about it. And executing out to one - ie starting up a brand new process from scratch - is NOT the same as doing a fork(). But then if you had a clue you'd have known that.

          2. tom dial Silver badge

            Re: can Windows fork() processes yet?

            Yep, a thread or two inside the same process so they can gleefully trample each other to death, neatly sidestepping the advantages delivered by multiple address spaces.

            Multiple threads have a place; IBM had them in their mainframe OS at least as far back as MVS (1974 or earlier) and used them extensively in products like CICS and DB2. Separate address spaces provide protection from other processes and, for many applicatons, a far simpler, if less flexible, programming environment. Both techniques are useful, each in its place.

        2. W.O.Frobozz

          Re: Groan

          But but but but...NT is a MICROkernel.

          Have they trotted out that old nugget yet?

          I still fondly remember the old Unix World article on NT where Davey Cutler proudly announced he was going to "kill UNIX." Didn't work then, not working now. But I hear he's doing GREAT things running the Xbone division!

          (Because that's what the X-box developers needed, a bloody drill sergeant.)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Groan

            @W.O.Frobozz - I think you'll find that while NT didn't kill UNIX, it certainly broke the stangle-hold of Big Iron UNIX vendors on the datacentre. There will always be a place for the older technologies, just in the same way that Big Iron UNIX didn't kill the mainframe, NT won't kill UNIX and Linux won't kill Windows NT, they'll all exist in a heterogeneous environment with each performing to its own strengths.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Groan

      Around the same time as obvious trolls like you learn anything about modern Windows, maybe?

    3. JLV

      Re: Groan

      >When will MS learn to use a decent server OS and not a scaled up single user, single microprocessor OS.

      Yeah, I always get blank stares from Windows users when I explain that Unix cut its teeth on university servers where everyone was trying to hack into everyone else's accounts.

      (disclaimer: speaking, perhaps naively, as a dev, not a sysadmin)

      However, I don't get the sense that Windows Server itself is the issue with all these Azure failures. The underlying OS may or may not be able to support "the cloud".

      Rather, Microsoft as a cloud vendor, not an OS vendor, just does not seem to have the right mindset to _manage_ a cloud. They always seem to be stumbling into single-point-of-failure management component snafus.

      Amazon has had a few of those in the last few years, but MS seems to just have more of these failures and be less good at learning from them.

      i.e. MS would probably still screw up Azure if it was riding on top of Linux rather than Windows ;-)

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    No, Steve, come back here. Come, COME BACK, dammit. Plug that back in. Yes, you, I saw you.

    Plug that back in and then give me that data centre access card. Thank you. You can go now.

  3. Andy ORourke

    outlook.com too

    Email crapped out too?

    1. V 2

      Re: outlook.com too

      Yep... Hotmail has died.

      1. hplasm
        Coat

        Re: outlook.com too

        Who would notice that? Spammers?

      2. chivo243 Silver badge
        Pint

        Re: outlook.com too

        Is Hotmail really down? Our users can't send to hotmail with the error:

        [hotmail.com]: Name or service not known

        If this is really true and no coincidence, some one please let me know

        Have a pint on me!

  4. Brandon Paddock

    Working here

    The Azure service dashboard seems to be working here, as are the services my company hosts on Azure.

    The dashboard says there's a partial service interruption for storage services in the North Central US datacenter, though.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Working here

      downvoted for hosting your company on that junk

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Working here

        @AC 08:53: Downvoted for being a bell-end.

        1. Bumpy Cat

          Re: Working here

          @AC 09:18: If you downvote people on the Internet just for being a bellend, you'll never get anything else done.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Working here

            @Bumpy Cat - Good point, I usually just think it, but that one annoyed me during a coffee break.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Working here

              Hi Steve, is that you?

    2. Circadian
      Trollface

      Re: Working here

      @Brandon

      Please name your company so that I have an idea of the "quality" of service I may expect. Oh, Microsoft you say?

  5. Bucky O' Hare

    Outlook 365 up and down for me

    Works on some connections, not on others.

    Come on dear boys get it together....

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So many services use Azure

    Office 365 is down for our organization, why do they put so many services on Azure? Really? A game system along side enterprise services? MS may be late to the game but why screw it up and be late? Most late comers would perfect the system.

    1. Brandon Paddock

      Re: So many services use Azure

      First off, that's what Azure is... a cloud services platform. Where else would they run their cloud services?

      Azure itself isn't down. Still more detail coming out but it looks like there was a global DNS issue which looks to be cleared up now. Unclear where the bad DNS info originated.

      Fortunately it looks like the problem didn't last very long.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: So many services use Azure

        Yes but why not have an Azure enterprise and an Azure gaming, they don't have to mix. Much like running a business you don't mix personal and business finances, sure you could but your accountant will give you crossed eyes at all the trouble you have given him.

        There was no detail when I started noticing the drop in services, DNS wasn't on the radar at that moment, but I'm curious now; playstation network has been having DNS issues last night, our internet service at the office lost DNS early morning. Man in the middle again, like Afghanistan blocking YouTube?

  7. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge

    Are we going to start calling this ASOD (the Azure Screen of Death)?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      RE: ASOD

      Not really necessary... azure is just another shade of blue with a fancy name.

      Basically it's just a more snobby BSOD.

  8. MrDamage

    As advertised

    Microsoft can truly design multitasking services.

    They can launch, and crash, simultaneously.

  9. rossde

    I can't connect to my hotmail account here in Oz, is that related?

  10. janimal

    Can we now infer that the GTA:online cloud services are provided by azure too? They have been shit since launch, are guaranteed to fail every weekend and coincidentally many people are reporting time outs, emptying sessions & cloud unavailable issues today and it isn't even the weekend.

    I have suspected for a while that MS were providing Rockstar's (abysmal) cloud services. Would someone at El Reg care to investigate (if web journalists do any investigating anymore?)

    [edit] Seems they are investigating, but R* don't want to talk, I'll try to reign in my cynicism in future :)

  11. Goat Jam

    Industry Leaders

    You have to hand it to Microsoft. In terms of entertainment value they really do lead the IT industry.

  12. Tom 260

    I did get a 'Some Xbox Live services are unavailable' message on my 360 console a couple of hours ago, but just assumed that was down to the GMT+1/2 Europeans downloading the 1.3GB day one patch for the XOne...

  13. dan1980

    More cloud!!! Quick, everyone - jump on before you're left behind!

    I've been rather sweary lately so I'll refrain for the moment but all the same, it's a getting to be a joke. Not because things go down - that happens - but because companies like MS are fairly FORCING people onto their cloud platforms. Please. Stop.

  14. Oh Homer
    Paris Hilton

    Microsoft is clueless about networking

    And always has been.

    It's as simple as that.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Microsoft is clueless about networking

      You really are becoming the replacement Eadon, aren't you?

      Don't let the fact that your comments are demonstrably untrue let you stop, though.

      1. Oh Homer

        Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

        Oh look, it's my stalker!

        If you look carefully at the article, you'll note that my "demonstrably untrue" comment has in fact just been clearly demonstrated, once again, by Microsoft. It even notes some of those other occasions when Microsoft demonstrated it. There are in fact articles going back decades that demonstrate how awful Windows networking is, and has always been, to the extent that it's become a cliché.

        But don't let something as trivial as the facts get in your way.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

          No, not your stalker - I did see your comments the other day and suggested that if you don't want people to look at your posts and form an opinion about you because of them, there is always the "post anonymously" option.

          BTW: What makes you think that you're interesting enough to be stalked?

          As for your comment that "MS know nothing about networking" and suggesting that an outage to DNS proves this, you seem to conveniently disregard the fact that there a millions upon millions of devices from living room to desktop to server running MS networking software and doing it perfectly happily. One outage does not "know nothing" make. There are plenty of things to accuse MS of, but being clueless about networking really isn't one of them. Not since about DOS 3.1.

          1. Chris_J

            Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

            Doesn't Windows use BSD TCP/IP stack from about NT onwards?

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

              @Chris_J - No, it did briefly use the BSD IP stack in Windows NT 3.1 when the implementation was outsourced to a company called Spider Systems (IIRC), but it was replaced with a full in house MS IP stack in Windows NT 3.5.

              1. Chris_J

                Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

                Hmm this path and files within feels very *nix like to me: /Windows/System32/drivers/etc

                Thats on a Windows 7 system.

                Surely if it was a pure in house MS implementation they would lump all that into a central registry?

                1. Youngdog

                  Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

                  It could be worse - if Gates hadn't been so 'meh' about the Internet in the early days the whole thing could have ended up running on WINS. It's to their credit they realised they had to stop flogging that dead horse

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

                  @Chris_J - You are mixing up BSD tools and the IP/Networking stack. Windows uses the BSD tools for things like FTP, Telnet, etc. etc. All the IP stack stuff is in the registry, the things which the BSD tools require are by necessity in /etc.

                  1. Mike Pellatt

                    Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

                    "All the IP stack stuff is in the registry"

                    Whaaaat ??? Since when did executable code live in the registry ??

                    Oh, I see, you meant to say "All the IP stack configuration stuff is in the registry"

                    Which broken configuration method that Windows offers you choose to employ when porting (and it was impressive for MS to come up with an even more broken system than .ini files) is pretty irrelevant to the heredity of the code you're porting.

                    1. Anonymous Coward
                      Anonymous Coward

                      Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

                      You may not like the Registry, but storing configuration in a versioned, ACLd, database seems like a pretty good idea to me. You can't scatter config across the system as happens in some other OSes, you don't have to put up with a config file being an all or nothing access thing, so you can allow users the ability to control aspects of their settings in an extremely granular manner. You also don't have the problem of non-standard names for files, which occurs in other OSes.

          2. hplasm
            Windows

            Re: "There are plenty of things to accuse MS of..."

            "...being clueless about networking really isn't one of them"

            Yes it is. As true now as it always has been.

            NETBUI, NETBIOS; netbollocks.

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

            There are plenty of things to accuse MS of, but being clueless about networking really isn't one of them. Not since about DOS 3.1.

            Oh puhleez. We had to stick a Wollongong IP stack on MS Denial of Service 3.1 to make it use anything resembling TCP/IP, and it was still damn hard work as DOS 3x didn't really have too much in the way of ISO layering (even then, MS "integration" got in the way of Making Things Work (™). Heck, even ARCnet was hard work, but that was admittedly also a byproduct of how PCs worked in those days - the eternal fight with IRQs and other settings, and then the joy of trying to get as much of the TSRs above 640k so you could actually still get software to load so it did something for the user too. I can recall using PowerLAN in those days in the small company I was working at, and file exchange with our other offices was some stuff I cooked up with modems and batch files (just in case you thought not having sufficient IT budget was a modern thing :) ).

            When MS then decided that networking was the thing (because it was losing its fight with Novell, even after altering Windows so it appeared "incompatible" with anything but MS DOS), it cooked up something called Windows for Workgroups which was soon dubbed Worries for Workgroups because it created a lot of interdependencies that could take a whole office down. In those days, Those Having A Clue were not MS, but Novell and IBM (well, ish - depends on your opinion and experience of Token Ring), with a helping of companies that started down the TCP/IP route over Ethernet.

            It took Citrix to show MS that servers could do more than just sharing some files and print jobs, but the history of MS and networking is patchy, and that's being positive. Do I need to remind you that Gates dismissed the Internet as a fad? You know, the guy that told us that 640k ought to be enough for everyone and then forced us to upgrade kit and memory every time they came out with a new release?

            You're confusing volume with quality. They still can't run a decent service - see all the outages. Anyone who creates a business dependency on any MS operated cloud needs IMHO his or her head examined.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "You really are becoming the replacement Eadon"

              Actually, a more accurate history is here, and I remember most of those products as we sold them..

      2. theblackhand

        Re: Microsoft is clueless about networking

        "Don't let the fact that your comments are demonstrably untrue let you stop, though."

        I present two examples:

        - NLB

        - MS suggesting that VM's moving between HyperV hosts should get new MAC addresses. Maybe it was just a dumbass L3 support person who suggested this, but still...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Microsoft is clueless about networking

          If your switches can't handle dynamic MAC address changes, you should probably get more modern switches. Besides, it's perfectly reasonable to change MAC addresses for virtual machines which are moving between physical hosts, I fail to see why this might be a problem?

          1. theblackhand

            Re: Microsoft is clueless about networking

            "If your switches can't handle dynamic MAC address changes, you should probably get more modern switches. Besides, it's perfectly reasonable to change MAC addresses for virtual machines which are moving between physical hosts, I fail to see why this might be a problem?"

            It's not a switch problem - they will happily move the packets around. However, layer-3 devices don't know the MAC address is changed and continue to address packets to the old host MAC.

            HyperV's competitors have an elegant solution to this same issue that shows some understanding of the networked environment.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Microsoft is clueless about networking

              Just read up on the MAC address problem - it appears that the MAC will only change at reboot time (all MACs are by default generated dynamically at boot time), if you do a normal migration between systems it shouldn't change, until reboot. You can use SCVMM to assign a permanent MAC (I assume there's a cmdlet to do this as well, should you not have SCVMM). If you're seeing other behaviour, you may want to check it out as it doesn't appear to be what's supposed to be happening.

              1. theblackhand

                Re: Microsoft is clueless about networking

                By default the MAC address doesn't change - this was a MS technical support provided fix for an issue with HyperV hosts not communicating with clients after moving servers between HyperV hosts. When the HyperV host moves, it doesn't notify the switch that the MAC address has moved ports (as VMware does) and instead waits for the server to send outbound traffic. Not so great for a web host.

                1. BongoJoe
                  Megaphone

                  Re: Microsoft is clueless about networking

                  As a user there are clearly problems with the networking within Windows.

                  Shares contantly get lost across the network, which may be more of a browsing issue, but it's still under the umbrella or networking. Permissions go walkabout and often never come back.

                  We've had to bolt on an 'update' to XP machines (for update read frig) so that Windows 7 macbines can see XP machines. If that isn't a bodge then I don't know what one is.

                  W7 sometimes forgets wehter it's at Home, at Work or in an Internet Cafe. That's perhaps more of something going wrong in the higher client layers but to a user using the network that's still a network issue.

                  How many times in various incarnations of Windows have we had to use tools to flush the TCP/IP stacks?

                  It can't be that hard to follow the protocols and to to get them work, can it? If other operating systems can do it then surely Microsoft can.

                  Since I started this message a Win7 lost a share with an XP development box (i.e. the share is still there but the machine has vanished according to W7) but the reverse from the XP development box to the clueless W7 machine is still rock solid.

                  Networking is certainly not one of Microsoft's strengths. They almost had it nailed down in the days of XP but even then there was that possibility of it just grinding to a halt. With Windows 7 there seems to be extra layers of cotton wool and confusion.

                  I vote for the motion that Microsft is clueless about networking.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: Microsoft is clueless about networking

                    Sorry to say it, but there is something wrong with your environment - I've been working on extremely large heterogeneous environments (FSTE100 and US equivalent) for nigh on 20 years with Windows forming the vast majority of workstation/file/print and I've not seen any of the problems you are seeing.

                    It's always worth considering the problem is with your own IT before blaming the OS/hardware.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Trollface

    Welcome to modern computing!

    Where all your capabilities come to a screeching halt the very moment your service provider decides as much (planned or unplanned doesn't really matter here). And some people wonder why I'm quite opposed to software subscription models ;-)

    I'm sure all those Office 365 users are quite thrilled right now, I also wonder if people can actually play any games at all on their XBox One.

    In the mean time I simply start up Word 2010 by clicking on its icon in the start menu and can get to work. Even if I'm no longer connected to the Innernets, such an amazing achievement don't you think?

    1. Ian 7

      Re: Welcome to modern computing!

      That shows a basic misunderstanding of what Office 365 is about - while you CAN use the web service to host and edit your documents, you can (and for an enterprise, you SHOULD and almost certainly WILL) also store them locally on your company server and edit them with an instance of Office 2013 installed locally on your workstation. Just like the old days. The idea is to give you flexibility, and it does that - whether the price is worth it to you is another question.

      1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

        Re: what Office 365 is about

        It is about pushing everyone to a subscription model and making their "local" Office suite phone home every now and then to enforce that.

        And that means that you are open to having your "local" copy locked and not be able to continue working if you don't pay your subscription. Or are you expecting me to believe that the day I would stop paying I could still access my documents ? I don't think so.

        As far as I'm concerned, Office 365 can go stuff it. I don't need to have my work stored outside of my purview and I will NOT accept to submit access to MY data to a third party.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    xbox.com / meet xboxone is still suffering problems. There's a tastefully decorated medieval themed room ruined by being overlaid with an ugly black box and vulgar sized TV.

  17. Eradicate all BB entrants

    It was only the other day ......

    ....... the biggest boss was asking me about Office 363, and this is why I love Microsoft. When a techy needs help saying migrating to it at this time would be bad for us they create a service failure to back me up.

    Keep it up MS, and ignore these guys as they still haven't worked out you are secretly helping us.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh DNS

    Such a BIND

  19. an it guy

    the later DNS problem was an Akamai cache error

    "Service Unavailable - DNS failure. The server is temporarily unable to service your request. Please try again later. Reference #11.27ddf180.1385076682.341919,"

    speaking as one who's had problems when a DNS server failed the routing and I couldn't get access to fix it. that's definitely Akamai reporting a problem contacting servers. I'm guessing something propogated badly into Akamai and was harder to eradicate than anyone thought. It's a design I've seen used (and fail) before.

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

      And why was this downvoted ? Seems a perfectly reasonable post to me. Are there Akamai fans grassrooting here, or what ?

      Have an upvote on me.

      1. an it guy

        thanks

        as the OP of that post,I was surprised to see thumbs down on a post I thought was a useful addition to the article.

        Oh well. At least it's a net thumbs up

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Quite handy really that our Helpdesk system is hosted in the cloud. We didn't have to log calls from all our users when they couldn't reach their email, since the helpdesk system was down too.

    Anonymous, because embarrassingly this is true - the great and the good decided is was "better" to move many services to one cloud - what a great experience for our users. (NOT)

    (It may or may not be Microsoft my company has used, it's the concept that's important)

  21. Gray
    Boffin

    The CLOUD!

    I have this mental picture of a sewer pipe with a gasbag at one end and a douchebag at the other. Is that the "Cloud" scene? And all of your computer/work has that sewer pipe connected directly to the Subscription Lords who will monitor all?

    IMHO -- be thankful when it fails!

    1. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

      Re: The CLOUD!

      I like this explanation :).

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Next shareholders meeting singalong

    Now, on Bill's que, singalong everybody. "Oops. I did it again......"

  23. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
    Alert

    Can we have a new icon please

    Something for "Cloud fatigue ahead".

    One can surely replace the lesser-used iconology.

  24. This post has been deleted by its author

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Fog

    The cloud is not technically down, it's just a little lower than normal.

    As such no refunds will be forthcoming.

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

      Re: Fog

      I foresee a new version of the parrot sketch.

  26. smartypants

    Solution: Rename Office 365 to Office 364

    There. Job done!

    What a silly title for a product. Imagine expecting it to be available every day!

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge
      Coat

      Yeah, but then they'll have to re-rename to Office 363 pretty soon, and that'll become a nuisance just like Patch Tuesday.

      Hey, maybe they'll merge the two notions.

  27. Bladeforce

    Maybe Billy Boy Gates

    Could use his new graphite condoms to plug the holes in Microsofts systems. If not he could give them to the specialist guys at Microsoft so they dont reproduce ever!

  28. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So these are the guys running a 'mandatory connection' games console. I shall continue to pass, thanks.

  29. paulc
    Mushroom

    And there I was...

    under the impression given by all the puff about cloud services that they were always available and would never go down on you unlike self hosted servers...

  30. Levente Szileszky

    For the 100th time...

    ...I can only repeat myself: anyone is relying any Microsoft online service for his critical services must be fired on the spot, period. MSFT has the industry's WORST RELIABILITY TRACK RECORD and WORST ARCHITECTURAL SETUP when it comes to DEALING WITH CASCADING ISSUES, ISOLATING OUTAGES, it's a fact.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: For the 100th time...

      Yes, I'm going to take Enterprise IT advice from someone who can't work the shift lock key and doesn't understand basic punctuation.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: For the 100th time...

        Anyone who thinks Azure is a good idea after micro$oft RTM Vista AND "8" needs an examination.

  31. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Strange, this outage coincides with the internal network going down at MS (at least in the building I work in as a contractor). No access to network drives, internet, or mail, but somehow the phone through Lync still worked.

  32. Nya
    FAIL

    This is why anything cloud related is utter crap. You have no real control of anything yourself.

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Doesn't Azure....

    ...mean the sky is cloudless?

    The clue's in the name, I guess...

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021