Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Lost Password
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)

    Verisign/NSI ICANN, VeriSign and the Future of .Net
    posted by michael on Thursday September 30 2004, @10:34AM

    sforrest writes "The investment firm Legg Mason thinks VeriSign has only two real competitors for running the .net registry, Afilias and NeuLevel, in the selection process underway at ICANN.

    The investment firm issued a five-page report on Sept. 22 titled Investors' Guide To Dot-NET Recompete, provided to me by a friend in the brokerage business, that summarizes the issues, angles and strategies at play in the process of selecting the next operator of the .net registry. VeriSign is the incumbent.

    The report is copyrighted and I have not received permission from Legg Mason to post the complete 5-page PDF file online, so I can only excerpt it for you. "

    "Legg Mason analysts Todd C. Weller, CFA; D. Wright, and Steven T. Erhartic, CFA, write,
    As the incumbent, we expect VeriSign to focus on the stability of the Internet and its track record of operating both the dot-NET and larger dot-COM registries. While dot-NET currently represents just 4.9 million of the total 34 million dot-COM and dot-NET names, we came across some data from VeriSign that indicates that dot-NET is more important in terms of the functioning of the Internet than meets the eye. For example, 25% of all other registered domain names rely on dot-NET nameservers that are being pointed to from other domains, such as dot-COM. Dot-NET also drives 31% of all Web page views annually and 9% of U.S.-based Web e-mail accounts. In short, while dot-NET is small relative to dot-COM in terms of units, the functioning of dot-NET appears to be very important to the functioning of the larger Internet.

    We expect competitors, such as Afilias and NeuLevel to primarily focus on the promotion of competition in the registry market while also looking to demonstrate that they can provide stable stewardship of the dot-NET registry. Afilias
    Here's a summary of the key points:
  • Two main selection criteria likely to center on stability of Internet and promotion of competition. Expect VeriSign to rely on stability and others to rely on competition.
  • While dot-NET represents just 4.9 million of the 34 million dot-COM and dot-NET names, data indicates it is more critical to the operation of the Internet than meets the eye.
  • More competition at the registry level does not appear to benefit end users and may create more hassle for registrars. This could favor an existing registry operator.
  • For various reasons, we do not believe that price will be a key differentiator.
  • VeriSign's current lawsuit should not disadvantage them based on provisions in the original dot-NET agreement. VeriSign also has additional legal routes it can take if someone else is selected to operate dot-NET.
  • The process and ultimate outcome of dot-NET should have no bearing on dot-COM and it appears that VeriSign should be able to extend dot-COM for another four years unless ICANN can prove VeriSign has really not fulfilled its obligations in operating dot-COM."

      ICANNWatch Login  


    [ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]

      Related Links  
    · Afilias
    · VeriSign/NSI
    · ICANN
    · sforrest
    · More Verisign/NSI stories
    · Also by michael
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    ICANN, VeriSign and the Future of .Net | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 19 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    .NET registrants deserve/need stability
    by GideonsLastSon on Thursday September 30 2004, @04:25PM (#14248)
    User #3824 Info | http://icannwatch.jothan.at/start.php
    I have a great deal of fear that a subsequent .NET operator who cannot at very least match the current stable operation of the TLD might get selected due to what I percieve as a selection process that might show principle bias towards:

    1] A company that a stakeholder themselves or friend is involved with (you know who you folks are)

    2] ANY company as long as it is not encumbent operator.

    The impact of a transition to another operator will unavoidably cause a (hopefully) brief disruption to registration (if not resolution) systems if we learned anything from the .ORG transition.

    I hope that, whatever the outcome of the RFP process, that dispassionate and rational minds prevail in selecting the .NET operator.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    .Net and National Security
    by BC Brown on Tuesday October 05 2004, @09:33AM (#14289)
    User #4013 Info
    The economic security and national security picture that is now the backdrop of the re-compete of the .Net registry agreement is far different than it was when VeriSign was originally selected to run it. There are far more users on the Internet, the economic reliance on the network for transactions now amounts to billions of dollars of eCommerce. The registries are at some level interdependent, including .gov.

    On the security front, the United States is engaged in a war and we are confronting a global terrorist threat targeted at undermining our national security by destabilizing our economic security. Our reliance on networks for communication, data exchange and as pipelines for transactions is a key factor in securing our economic well being.

    Clearly competition in this process is important. In the current environment however the most important reality is that the registry and the network have to be stable and function well. They have to be as secure as they can be and they must deliver service in a challenging, geopolitical environment that may not always be peaceful.

    In a time of war what the economy needs, what markets expect, what commerce requires is stability. Whoever can deliver stable service in this environment will have a leg up.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • 5 replies beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:

    Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
    You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com