Slashdot Mirror

That was the case before, but may not be entirely correct now. I am still looking for more information from ICANN but they seem to be concentrating on the political rather than the technical.

Nowadays there are alternative registrars that actually seem to take you through the whole process. I gather that NSI is still on the backend but you do not actually become an NSI customer anymore. Unfortunately I haven't had an opportunity to try anybody out yet, I have more important things to do like reading Slashdot (-:

Maybe we can get someone who works for one of those registrars to clear things up here?

(P.S. I will... ummm... not be dropping by NSI anytime soon with the explosives that I don't have. :-)

Register.com was the first. Joker.com is currently the cheapest (it's based in Germany but its English webpages are passable).

Jamie McCarthy

First of their database is barely updated nowadays so your better off using their Shared Registration Service (SRS) database for queries here.

Secondly this should be unconstitutional being that the whois database is not theirs. Maybe they should advertise that and donate the money to ICANN ooops That'd probably hurt them more then it would help them since they seem to want to monopolize the Domain Registration business.

heh the John Gotti's of the Domain registration world.

Someone should wake them up from their domination fantasies. register.com registers more domain than they do.

Maybe they should join in the adverstising business and give NSI (network stupidity inc) a run for the monopolized cash.

home sweet home

Esther Dyson is on the board of ICANN
What was your domain name again? (clicky-click)

My first though was to reply to this with an "Amen". NSI is not, has never been, and will never be the "Internet Authority" (Patent Pending [or so they think]).

Aside from the other officially sanctioned registrars, I seem to recall reading about a volunteer organization (probably on /.) offering to provide DNS services without the value-added BS of NSI. Anyway, with more registrars being accredited, I'd say its time to put NSI behind us completely.

While considering the implications of all this, I was perusing www.iana.org and was delighted at the prominent notation:

Please note that this transitional site presents both initial steps and currently accepted practices that are subject to input by the international Internet community and approval by the Board of Directors.

If you go to their site, there is a forum for public comments. /.'em with honest, frank, unflaming input on why the agreement with NSI should be terminated.

Now, if you want to be horrified, go to www.internic.net to read about the coming changes in Domain registration. First, you'll notice that you're really at networksolutions.com. But wait! If you read really, really slow (just leave the window open), you will be automatically forwarded to the NSI front door.

Going deeper into the ICANN FAQ, I found Ammendment 11 to the Dept. of Commerce/NSI contract. An excerpt regarding existing NSI customers:

• Commencing upon the Phase 1 deployment of the Shared Registration System, and for a period of 18 months thereafter, NSI shall permit any customer with whom it has a contract pursuant to which NSI provides registration services that is either facially or effectively exclusive as to registration services, to terminate the registration provisions of such contract (following payment of all amounts due up through the time of such termination) and obtain registration services from other registrars; provided, however, that NSI may enter into agreements pursuant to which NSI's counterparty agrees not to utilize proprietary intellectual property or confidential proprietary information provided by NSI to the counterparty pursuant to their agreement.

If I'm reading that right, anyone registered with NSI can switch to another registrar, with a pro-rated refund of domain fees.

Back to the original topic: Putting NSI on the RBL would be a serious wake-up call that without the participation of each and every transport provider on the 'net, they are worthless (Ok, MORE worthless).

--

Jim Rutt is a long-time acquaintance of mine from the Well. When he was hired out of Thomson to run NSI recently, I hoped things there would turn a corner.

Instead, it's getting worse. As has been pointed out, NSI is basically announcing its claim of compilation copyright on the whois database. This is the same greedy crap that West Publishing does with court rulings, and that many an online service does with the postings of its members.

This is evil and must be stopped.

Jim Rutt is a smart guy. I advised him to drop the claims on whois and get to the business of fixing their broken customer service system. So far he is heading in directly the opposite direction.

Yesterday ICANN announced that 15 candidate registrars have been approved to add to the five existing ones. There are 37 more awaiting certification. Probably 5 to 10 will survive as more than mere niche players. Let's insist on better customer support, service, reliability and lack of greed, and may the best registrar win.

It won't be NSI, though.

--------

The ICANN is on probation. So long as they seem to be making progress towards breaking the NSI monopoly, they will be tolerated by the IETF, however if the ICANN goes rogue, there are still technical mechanisms available to reign both them and NSI in again.

The major problem is that Jon Postel died at the worst possible moment, when his vigilance was/is most required.

NSI is fighting for its life, and its officers know that. Their "service" has been so poor over the term that they've had the InterNIC contract that the minute there is viable competition, it is likely that most registrants will switch providers, and NSI will dry up and blow away (but not before the Securities & Exchange Commission gets ahold of them and prosecutes the corporate officers for fraud; they claimed that they owned ".com" in their prospectus. They do not).

We live in interesting times.

Yes, DO read about the initial board of directors. Looks like pretty competent people to me, and a good international mix of people from industry and academia.

And read this while you're at it.

Do you have any specific objections, or are you mainly into unsubstantiated slurs?

--

Yes, DO read about the initial board of directors. Looks like pretty competent people to me, and a good international mix of people from industry and academia.

And read this while you're at it.

Do you have any specific objections, or are you mainly into unsubstantiated slurs?

--

I don't understand what people don't like about ICANN. People opposed either seem to 1) make unsubstantiated name-calling slurs, 2) have strong monetary reasons they don't like ICANN, or 3) want the United States to rule the Internet.

Several points to consider:

1. ICANN is a non-profit corporation with a strong policy against conflicts of interest. They're not in anyone's pocket.
   
2. Membership policy hasn't been finalized yet, but you will be able to participate. In fact, you're encouraged to now.
   
3. This is basically what Jon Postel proposed .
   

So what's people's problem?

--

I don't understand what people don't like about ICANN. People opposed either seem to 1) make unsubstantiated name-calling slurs, 2) have strong monetary reasons they don't like ICANN, or 3) want the United States to rule the Internet.

Several points to consider:

1. ICANN is a non-profit corporation with a strong policy against conflicts of interest. They're not in anyone's pocket.
   
2. Membership policy hasn't been finalized yet, but you will be able to participate. In fact, you're encouraged to now.
   
3. This is basically what Jon Postel proposed .
   

So what's people's problem?

--

I don't understand what people don't like about ICANN. People opposed either seem to 1) make unsubstantiated name-calling slurs, 2) have strong monetary reasons they don't like ICANN, or 3) want the United States to rule the Internet.

Several points to consider:

1. ICANN is a non-profit corporation with a strong policy against conflicts of interest. They're not in anyone's pocket.
   
2. Membership policy hasn't been finalized yet, but you will be able to participate. In fact, you're encouraged to now.
   
3. This is basically what Jon Postel proposed .
   

So what's people's problem?

--

I don't understand what people don't like about ICANN. People opposed either seem to 1) make unsubstantiated name-calling slurs, 2) have strong monetary reasons they don't like ICANN, or 3) want the United States to rule the Internet.

Several points to consider:

1. ICANN is a non-profit corporation with a strong policy against conflicts of interest. They're not in anyone's pocket.
   
2. Membership policy hasn't been finalized yet, but you will be able to participate. In fact, you're encouraged to now.
   
3. This is basically what Jon Postel proposed .
   

So what's people's problem?

--

Fear not! Those incompetant idiots at NSI may have dodged this bullet, but there are two more on the way:

1. NSI is under suspicion for securities fraud for having claimed in their prospectus for their Initial Public Offering (IPO) of stock that they owned .com, which they obviously do not.

2. The new Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) now owns the "root" of the DNS, and is in the process of setting up a shared registry system. This means that NSI will not be the only company through which you can register a domain name, and given this competition, it is unlikely that NSI will survive, because they are incompetant.

In short, NSI is still facing their well deserved doom.

At 500 domains per month (which is low), a new registrar is paying $35.75 per domain - which is more than they pay now per domain.

This doesn't take into account the added cost of the hardware and business spec for participating...

This is precisely why NSI had to announce that they owned the data; otherwise, the Prospectus for their public stock offering was a lie (it also claimed this), and thus NSI would be guilty of fraud.

The Securities & Exchange Commission which regulates the financial markets takes a very dim view of such things. Potentially, the officers and directors of NSI could be held criminally liable, and face prison time in addition to stiff fines.

Personally, I look forward to seeing those bastards strung up by their toes. The most enraging thing about this whole affair is NSI's rank incompetence in operating a key piece of Internet infrastructure, which has threatened the stability of the Internet as a whole.

Where ICANN is concerned, I'm willing to play "wait & see"; the most worrisome thing about them is that they also appear to be vying for some kind of control. They need to understand that they merely perform a service and administration function at the pleasure of the IETF, and not the other way around as they have been claiming.

I submitted an article to slashdot the other day about an article over at internetnews.com about the domain change, and how many people were upset. It wasn't posted, but I still think it's pretty good. I also noticed today that there's another article concerning how ICANN and NTIA aren't happy with Network Solutions, and also whether or not Network Solutions is violating their agreement with ICANN.
NTIA and ICANN may also be good sources to voice opinions to concerning this sudden change Network Solutions has performed.

I submitted an article to slashdot the other day about an article over at internetnews.com about the domain change, and how many people were upset. It wasn't posted, but I still think it's pretty good. I also noticed today that there's another article concerning how ICANN and NTIA aren't happy with Network Solutions, and also whether or not Network Solutions is violating their agreement with ICANN.
NTIA and ICANN may also be good sources to voice opinions to concerning this sudden change Network Solutions has performed.

I submitted an article to slashdot the other day about an article over at internetnews.com about the domain change, and how many people were upset. It wasn't posted, but I still think it's pretty good. I also noticed today that there's another article concerning how ICANN and NTIA aren't happy with Network Solutions, and also whether or not Network Solutions is violating their agreement with ICANN.
NTIA and ICANN may also be good sources to voice opinions to concerning this sudden change Network Solutions has performed.

I find the present DNS situation highly disturbing. I have written a very comprehensive document explaining why this is such a big threat.

Network Solutions monopolistic ambitions are clear. The difficult question is how to stop them. Right now there appears little that can be done other than trusting that the government and ICANN don't screw up.

Its also important to realize that this is a "recommendation" to be handed to ICANN.

ICANN has commissioned a report from the Berkman Center for Internet and Society (at Harvard) on representation in cyberspace. There are various ways to comment --- its important that everyone at least takes a look!