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

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
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)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    VeriSign Says SiteFinder is Just Napping | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 5 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    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.
    is 30 days long enough ...
    by domainlaw on Thursday October 16 2003, @06:25AM (#12477)
    User #3836 Info
    Is 30 days long enough for us to start our own Internet, so we can tell Verisign to go stuff theirs? Maybe we can even start our own ICANN while we're at it -- after all, it shouldn't be hard to improve on the original. Verisign, ICANN, New.Net, etc., can go off and play in their little fantasy world, and the rest of us will have an Internet that actually works.

    (Oh yes, I almost forgot -- spammers, you're welcome to stay in Verisign's legacy net; they're likely to be more gullible anyway.)
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:is 30 days long enough ...
    by ldg on Thursday October 16 2003, @10:15PM (#12489)
    User #2935 Info | http://example.com/
    Please tell me how creating a different internet will help anything where SiteFinder is concerned. The problem with it is that it is the TLD itself that controls SiteFinder, so anyone who plans to keep their .com or .net domains relies upon the TLD server.

    Sure we can - and do - have several roots that people can switch to. That doesn't have a thing to do with the TLDs other than the fact that they are included in the rootzone.

    The entire issue is that this type of control should not be used at the core - or top levels - of the internet. If it were done at root level, the root would answer as authoritative for all TLDs rather than the TLDs answering as authoritative for themselves. The result is erroneous messages being returned to all those doing domain lookups, which in turn negates the purpose of accuracy in the zone files.

    I think it's going to be intersting to watch how DNS server operators will react as we go down this road. My servers will reject anything that is not delegated and the TLDS who are configured to use wildcards... well, there domain might just not make it through. Oh well.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]


    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