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    This discussion has been archived.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.
    Site Finder: Here We Go Again? | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 11 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.
    Fast track?
    by fnord (groy2kNO@SPAMyahoo.com) on Monday February 09 2004, @08:01PM (#12961)
    User #2810 Info
    Let's do the math:
    ...the company might relaunch its "Site Finder" service as early as April.
    ~Stratton Sclavos, VeriSign CEO
    That was to investors last month so that presumably doesn't count as notice, nor does the current news article, but:
    VeriSign assured ICANN that it would give 60 to 90 days' warning to resolve any remaining technological problems.
    ~John Jeffrey, ICANN General Counsel
    Apart from the implication that they're leaving it up to ICANN to resolve remaining technological problems (a rather curious position), it is now Feb. 9/10 depending where you are, so they could easily give notice and go live again in April. Yikes!

    With ICANN now under fire from both the US Congress and some foreign governments, in addition to their usual legion of critics, perhaps VeriSign feels it is safely time to pile on.

    That is if VeriSign doesn't wait for the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee, and VeriSign may be growing impatient, the SECSAC home page [icann.org], dealing prominently with Site Finder, hasn't been updated at all in the last four months (how quick would these folks be given a serious security/stability crisis?). And that's assuming VeriSign hasn't already given such notice to ICANN. We, of course, cannot expect prompt disclosure. -g

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    delegation-only
    by jon787 on Tuesday February 10 2004, @03:58AM (#12962)
    User #3866 Info | http://tesla.homelinux.net/
    This announcement finally got me to upgrade my BIND server to one with the delegation-only patch.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    No DNS Entry for "sitefinder.verisign.com"
    by dmehus on Tuesday February 10 2004, @01:28PM (#12964)
    User #3626 Info | http://doug.mehus.info/
    It's worth noting that as recently as seven or eight days ago, the DNS entry in the "verisign.com" zone file for "sitefinder.verisign.com" still existed. The SiteFinder Web page also was up, several months after VeriSign removed the wildcard from the root.

    As of today though, that DNS entry has been removed, and presumably, so has the Web site content for SiteFinder. It begs the question, why would VeriSign choose to shut down the SiteFinder website completely this week?

    To be quite honest, I don't see VeriSign reviving SiteFinder, at least not until it gets permission, in writing, from ICANN. ICANN most likely won't give that permission until SECSAC issues its final report and the ICANN Board adopts the policy recommendations of SECSAC.

    Remember, isn't NET up for redelegation this year? If VeriSign were to unilaterally revive SiteFinder simply by serving ICANN 60 days notice, it would pretty much seal its fate that it would not win the right to continue as the registry operator for dot-net. :)

    Some thoughts,
    Doug
    Doug Mehus http://doug.mehus.info/ [mehus.info]
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Sitefinder before the courts...
    by finee on Tuesday February 10 2004, @08:23PM (#12966)
    User #2781 Info | http://www.FineE.com
    My take is that the fate of sitefinder may well be decided by the courts. For example the following case by the Rothken Law Firm and Locks Law Firm as attorneys for plaintiffs. Sitefinder Litigation [techfirm.com]
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Verisign $200 Million
    by PageHowe on Thursday February 12 2004, @05:51AM (#12969)
    User #3551 Info
    Does anyone know if there were audit requirments to verify the $200,000,000 verisign was supposed to spend on infrastucture and universal WHois back when the 2001 agreements were signed.

    [ 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