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    This discussion has been archived.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 embarks on a Multilingual Strategy | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 15 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.
    Re: VeriSign embarks on a Multilingual Strategy
    by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Wednesday June 12 2002, @05:55AM (#7114)
    User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
    My God!

    Verisign is doing for IDN what New.net tried to do for new TLDs!

    How is this any different?!

    ++Peter
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    Re: VeriSign embarks on a Multilingual Strategy
    by Grumpy on Thursday June 13 2002, @05:06AM (#7149)
    User #2759 Info
    Very interesting report from ComputerWire (via The Register), alleging that Verisign's plug-in actually resolves IDNs as 3LDs within "mltbd.net" - another domain conveniently registered to VGRS.

    If the report's accurate, does that mean that Verisign's solution IS identical to New.Net?

    - Grumpy
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: VeriSign embarks on a Multilingual Strategy
    by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Wednesday June 12 2002, @06:48AM (#7122)
    User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
    You must be kidding. How does the fact that New.net claimed that it was running TLDs in an alt root make it any different? Your logic is seriously flawed.

    New.net required a plugin to see their content regardless of source. Verisign requires a plugin to see their content, regardless of source.

    In both cases, what's being sold is an addition or enhancement to the DNS that requires a plugin. In both cases, the data is stored in the DNS. In the case of New.net, in a 4th level domain. In the case of Verisign, in a newly-purchased 2nd level domain. But in both cases, you need special software to make use of it.

    They are absolutely identical.

    ++Peter
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Dueling plugins
    by Undecided on Wednesday June 12 2002, @01:31PM (#7133)
    User #3285 Info
    I was just going to say that, myself. There already have been complaints about the new.net plugin disabling (or being disabled by) similar plugins (like the RealNames plugin). The Versigin client almost certainly will cause problems for New.Net, and vice versa.

    All of the "alternate naming" plugins work the same way: They hijack Internet Explorer's "Search from address bar" (which normally sends unresolvable type-ins to MSN) so that it sends type-ins to the plugin's company. When a user installs more than one alternate-naming plugin, it's usually the most-recently installed plugin that's going to end up controlling the address bar.

    I hate to say it, but I think new.net is currently winning the "Most Plugin Installed" contest. I say this because a lot of non-NewNet webmasters have started seeing a small traffic stream from New.Net's search engine, Quick. (It includes non-NewNet domains in its results.)

    I think Verisign might have enough influence to give New.Net a run for the money, though. It all depend which is a more popular idea: new TLDs or multilingual TLDs. I expect there will be a lot of complaints about dueling plugins in the near future.

    I wonder what they're saying about this in the new.net forums?
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: VeriSign embarks on a Multilingual Strategy -
    by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Wednesday June 12 2002, @04:59PM (#7137)
    User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
    Yes, but SHOULD they do this?

    It's not clear to me that they should. Especially after making such a to-do about New.net's identical solution.

    If ICANN and others aren't hypocritical, they will complain about this just as loudly as they did when New.net introduced their plug-in.

    Then again, I don't expect that to happen. ICANN is about as hypocritical an organisation as there is.

    ++Peter
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply 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