Slashdot Mirror
Afternic Sues ICANN, Claims Unfair Treatment
gfoyle writes: "The NY Times is reporting (free registratration required) that the cash strapped Icann is being sued by Afternic for being denied entrance into the domain registration market. This is believed to be the first suit challenging Icann's authority over domain registrations." The NYT article points out that both Network Solutions and Register.com now offer domain resale services -- services on which basis Afternic says ICANN rejcted their application to be a top-tier registrar.
In other words it's turning into a pile of useless, moronic shit just like the crap the said corporations churn out in their TV and print media. Oh, hooray, that is an improvement.
The irony is, of course, that today's "multimedia experience" is as dull as ditch-water and twice as predictable.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
I just went to joker.com and registered a dot com for 12 euros/year. No bullshit, no $70 NSI ripoffs, no mandatory fucked up hosting fer MAXIBUXX crap, just CLICK CLICK CLICK it's mine for 10 dollah SUCKY SUCKY.
I plug again, joker.com.
PLUG PLUG PLUG
JOKER.COM
DontBlow.com is an absolute good.
Why the fsck do people on Slashdot seem to think that the net has gone from a government toy to a corporate tool? The one place I would not expect to see repeated
The Internet (IMHO) was created by government for the army and used by the only people who could figure out how to make it do something useful and then improved upon by them until eventually even stupid corporate managers could start to remember that they just had to open the right program and type in a domain name, then the net got spamdotted to hell. What is the corporate signal to noise ratio online (i.e. complete bag of poo sites to something with a modicom of sense) and is it any better than the signal to noise ratio of joe blogg's homepages? Lets face it the net is a pile of poo with a few plants thriving in the manure, it doesn't matter how any DNS system is organised, the cream will float and the dung will drop out of view. The only people who care about this rubbish are the fools who belive that the "magic" of having many people staggering over their site by accident is worth an IPO. Lets leave this behind here on Slashdot and start accepting that the net is not anyones and should never be anyones, it is a co-operative system where barriers of entry are minimal and we can all stick up our own signal or noise. Lets stop debating how we should help corporations structure the Internet to service their needs (like the current RIAA battle to corrupt the net to preserve their market).
The simple question is this, if the RIAA get a ban on the transferal of copyrighted material over a digital interface are you going to stop stripping your CDs onto your file-server so you can play them at any workstation in your house; and if Afternic get accredited as a reseller are you going to stop typing in domain names and start learning IP addresses? Let's get slashdot talking about how to create the next generation net based on distributed architectures NOT the last generation DNS system and how it is or isn't suiting corporate americas needs.
A finally to slightly justify and defend this rant:
- I have bought domain names for about $15 including DNS hosting (one email redirected to admin address and a url redirect) and I own the domain. Sounds like a good deal for consumers to me!
- The sites that try to do the are nearly without fail the worst sites online for s/n. The most brilliant multimedia sites are usually from the fans and hackers.
- If you don't want ICANN what do you want? Microsoft? IP? Gnutella based searching to find info? What? If you have a great idea, code it and see if the hackers are ready to split the net otherwise sit down and shut up.
This may be written as flamebait but I mean it.Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
Well, there is a ".us". For example, there is the State of California site. Many US .gov-type sites arein the .us hiearchy. It is true that you don't see too many US .com's in ".us" though.
One major difference I see between Afternic and the other registrars: the others are primarily pushing registration with the resale being almost an afterthought, while Afternic seems from thier home page to be mainly aiming for resale with registration primarily to support that resale. To me this makes a world of difference.
You must have no concept of how IP routing works across the Internet. I think that the parent post of your comment implies that the box would be moving from one IP subnet to another one. Well, assuming that the entire Autonomous System isn't moving and that Internet-advertised BGP routes aren't changing, the box would have to change IP addresses. That's his point.. DNS makes it possible to transparently move box from one location to another location, changing IP addresses in the process. That is inherently a feature of DNS. You may have other qualms with it, but it's not all bad.
Anybody who runs a DNS server, and wishes to, could configure their name server to view my server as the root.
Then, I could implement whatever policy *I* feel is appropriate for handing out domain names (People Eating Tasty Animals gets priority, BTW).
I know that most people wouldn't use these servers (businesses, for example), but I bet someone could get a good underground following going (imagine a .sucks TLD - http://peta.sucks/).
So, why hasn't anybody else done this? Why couldn't I do this?
I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
What if you want to send a clueless user to download package xyz from ftp://ftp.xyz.fsf/, and their DNS isn't configured to resolve the .fsf TLD? (Some people can't even fix their DNS settings because they don't have root...)
.fsf and B creates another .fsf, how do you decide which xyz.fsf someone wants? I don't like the idea of getting 2 completely different http://linux.fsf/s depending on what machine I'm using to access it.
Another problem is dealing with 2 people creating the same TLD - if A creates
Any (good and workable) suggestions on fixing these problems?
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
Please see my earlier post on this topic. It's currently +5, and this whole discussion is so non-specific it's ridiculous. Yes, it would be neat if we could type "alt://" and have different addresses resolve by using a Gnutella-like system, therefore eliminating the need for ICANN. Is it feasible? Well, let's see, no one's even addressed that. How can you throw around ideas without even mentioning any technical aspect of them and get moderated to +4?
Hey, here's an idea: make it so that every file on the Internet can be downloaded at the same speed, regardless of how fast your connection is. Wow, that'd be neat!
Comon folks, at least think about the actual content of some of these comments before you moderate them up. Whoever thinks that the super-smart crowd that is Slashdot is collectively coming up with ground-breaking Internet concepts should go write an article for ZDNet about it... I'm sure they'd take it.
Different rules apply if you have a monopoly, which the ICANN Does with respect to allowing companies to register domain names in the .com, .net, and .org heiarchies.
If what they are accused of is indeed what happened, they broke the law and should be punished accordingly.
Of course, I think a better solution would be to simply stop paying attention to the ICANN and develop our own method for mapping names to ip addresses.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Yes, it would be neat if we could type "alt://" and have different addresses resolve by using a Gnutella-like system, therefore eliminating the need for ICANN. Is it feasible? Well, let's see, no one's even addressed that.
So, according to you, in order to even be permitted to express an idea in this or any forum, one must have already worked out all of the technical specifics, else said ideas should be ignored and derided?
Please.
Hacking a browser to call an alternative domain resolution service in response to an URL beginning with alt:// would be fairly simple. There are already modules to deal with ftp:// (FTP), mailto:, etc. Most of the code needed for the alt:// appraoch is already present, one needs to simply rip out the DNS resolution code and replace it with whatever the alternative approach would be.
As for a gnutella type system, if you'd even bothered to read my original post, you would have seen my suggestion to use the existing DNS software, perhaps running on a different port, with different root servers. Not that a more distributed and less top-down approach, a la FreeNet, wouldn't necessarilly be as good. Some technical robustness against hoards of lawyers might actually be worth a performance tradeoff, particularly in today's climate.
Comon folks, at least think about the actual content of some of these comments before you moderate them up.
Some of us do think. Perhaps you should do likewise before going off half-cocked. (HINT: Actually reading the post you're replying to helps).
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Another poster to this thread suggested that we get rid of the big 3 current TLDs and force companies and people to register domains in the appropriate country TLD. This would certainly limit confusion (Is that .com I'm looking at in the States, UK, Belgium? Where?)
I think active management by a set of domain registrars who have purchased name space off a TLD is the way to go. Don't just let any dipshit register any domain. It might make the process more expensive and increase waits, but ultimately that's the only way any semblance of order is to be had.
LDAP would probably be better suited for this sort of thing, too. Anyone feel like rewriting gethostbyname?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I don't see a clear reason why my machine has to use a particular method of resolving a text address to an IP address. Why can't we add our own top level domains by making our machines use a different DNS server to resolve, say, *.fsf or *.slashdot or even *.natalie ?
.fsf names, and make some simple java plugin that will cause the browser to resolve those correctly, then people will use it and these recurring domain name stories will become pointless noise.
If someone with a machine that can be a DNS server just appoints themselves head resolver honcho, then everyone who chooses to use the service can. Of course, perhaps Bruce and Eric might both start resolving *.communityloudmouth, but people will choose whose service to use individually, and I think that's the way it should be.
What would be needed is to set up the whole plan carefully, so that it was easy for users to assign different DNS servers to different blocks of domain names. This continuous annoyance would be fixed as people simply voted for the DNS servers they trusted. I for one would be delighted to point my DNS requests at a server that pledged to resolve etoy and etoys correctly, and ignored whatever judicial injuctions that the "official" top level DNS's choose to respect.
What has to be set up carefully is the tool which allows users to do this. If we make it easy for people to do what they want instead of what an incompetent committee rules, then the right things will happen. If you put useful information on machines with
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Do we really still need to keep the Internet robust vs. large-scale nuclear war?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
get the article here
circa75.com
I am amazed at the degree of ignorance that Slashdot readers show on this subject. Do the math! Suppose I want to visit a website I've never visited before, in a GTLD domain. My client makes a call to my DNS server. If it hasn't got the name in it's cache, it queries my ISPs DNS server; if it hasn't got the name in it's cache, it queries a root name server. The root name server issues it the NS record for the domain, and my ISP's DNS server then queries the authoritative name server for the domain. That's a maximum of four lookups. A CCTLD domain adds one, and each level of delegated subdomain adds another. But you're looking at a very small numbers of lookups.
By contrast in a peer to peer DNS network, in a world with many hundreds of thousands of DNS servers, to find an unknown, not commonly accessed domain would require tens of thousands of lookups if it were possible at all. At a tenth of a second per lookup, it would take about two hours to resolve the average domain name. In the mean time, because the load on DNS servers would have increased by three orders of magnitude, either far mor powerful servers would have to be used, or the DNS system would grind to a halt.
It's a technologically illiterate suggestion. Anyone who made it, go back and do maths 101.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
This sort of shows their support for squatters, which, while it seemed like a good idea a few years ago, is kind of a slimy way to make a quick buck.
Eh...
Even granting the premise that ICANN violated their bylaws in not approving Afternic's application, so what? Since when it is the job of the federal courts to hear cases about corporate bylaws brought by outside parties, not by employees, officers or stockholders?
Oh, since about the time people started bandying the word "justice" about.
It is called illegal restraint of trade, and it will get your ass fined and a substantial portion of your assets handed over to the offended party in this country if you are found guilty. If the ICANN did indeed do what they are accused of, there is a very good chance they are guilty and will have to make financial ammends for their behavior.
As much as we gripe about the justice system here in the US, it often appears to be the only functioning branch of government left, where there is at least some semblance of justice, occasionally, at times. The Legislative and Executive branches are, to all appearances, already a lost cause. The leading question is, of course, how long can a government stand on only one good leg (or branch).
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Including that default option was explictly one of the points I made in my original post. I agree, most users wouldn't bother to type alt:// if http:// were the default.
Even those who do not change their default to alt:// could be led there, via URL links of the form "A HREF="alt://myantimicrosoftsite.microsoft.com".
The notion is that the most common application of DNS today is with respect to the web. This solution does not address issues with respect to shell accounts, telnet, ssh, ftp, etc., although a more comprehensive, alternative name resolution system is probably called for.
As for techies forgetting about Internet NEwbies and AOL dorks, well, why not? They can educate themselves, just like the rest of us.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
According to the court filing, ICANN just doens't want to give reseller privledges to Afternic because of past violations of domain registration policies. While Register.com and Network Solutions are themselves not very customer friendly, Afternic went as far as massregistering domain names under made up names of people and companies, squatted on them, and then resold them. ICANN is is worried that if they let Afternic become a reseller, they'll take thier list of 5000 or so choice domains (and their equivants when the new TLDs become available) that ICANN obtained from afternic internal documents and set them aside in a higher priced area. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out in court
<IMHO>
Like the subject says, its the whole system that sucks! I say we need an international entity responsible for domain name assignment and dispute resolution, and that each country that wishes to participate in the Internet must acknowledge the entity's authority. Maybe a UN-sponsored organization? Is this too unreasonable in the long run?
</IMHO>
Washington, DC: It's like Hollywood for ugly people.
With the whole issue of the trampled namespaces, plus the many legal issues, I wonder if this may push people away from registering a bazillion more domains. Hmm... Nope. "It doesn't end in .com? That ain't a real Web site!"
TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
Even simpler. 'Zero Level' to the domain system. Think of it like this...
.microsoft server, and so forth.
.microsoft heiarchy, but once they registered a name (e.g www.microsoft) no one could take it away from them short of a court order presented to the owner of the name, who has sole power (in a technical sense) to remove it.
You keep the existing DNS, but fill in around it.
That's an interesting approach, although it does have the disadvantage of allowing the ICANN to retain its domain of authority.
Prehaps competing sets of root servers would be better, each addressable by either a different URL prefix, or a different "one-off" domain (microsoft.com.ican, microsoft.com.alt, etc...).
This assumes we stick with DNS, which might be more practical short term, but not necessarilly what we'd want in the long term.
An ideal situation would be an approach where no central authority exists to say "yeah" or "nay" to a domain name, where anyone can simply register a name, such as "jean-michel.smith" and, if no one else already has it, you get it. Any legal action is betwen you and whoever, as only you can change it (with your secret key, presumably -- this already assumes a slightly more sophisticated appraoch than the current DNS heiarchy.)
This doesn't necessarilly mean no heiarchy. One idea might be to have a hybrid system, in which each heiarchical level is peer to peer (with automated conflict resolution via timestamp or some other reasonably fair methodology), such that anyone can set up a root server in cooperation with other root servers, anyone can set up a
This would mean that Micrsoft wouldn't control all names within the
There are other issues which would need to be fleshed out, such as what to do if someone forgets or loses their private key (or claims they did) and so forth, but you get the idea.
As another put it, power and responsibility both reside with the individual registrant, to whom other parties and the legal system could turn if legal remedies were called for.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Disclaimer: I don't know what I'm talking about.
It seems to me that instead of having all this ICANN accreditation nonsense, any authoratitive DNS server should be world-writable, with some form of digital signature required to update an existing domain, but unregistered domains go to anyone who requests them. Billing could be done post-facto, or not at all.
Further, why not scrap the whole DNS heirarchy? Every ISP has at least two DNS servers, and they all talk to the upstream DNS servers until you get to the root servers. DNS should be made peer-to-peer, not top down, and the need for ICANN and it's 5M$/year budget goes out of the window.
At the time of writing, this was a first post.
--
E_NOSIG
heiarchical, but peer to peer at each level.
.linux), it is resolved by one of the peers at that level.
queries get passed up and down to the appropriate level as now for resolution. Peers would only have to cache databases for their level, not the entire internet.
Once reaching the appropriate level (e.g.
Anyone can add a peer, and manage a name within that level as they wish, with conflict resolution using timestamps or some other, reasonably fair appraoch.
Thus, no one has authority over any domain, top level or otherwise, yet everyone can remain certain that, once they have registered a name it is theres.
Possible problems: hijacking of lower level names.
E.g. you have a network my.firm, and you want to name all kinds of names like mars.my.firm, venus.my.firm, jupiter.my.firm, but some other jerk has gone around and registered millions of names, eating up most of the usable hostnames.
Possible solution? (This is probably heresy) Introduce a small modification to the standard domain name nomenclature, in which a hostname is seperated from the domain name by a different character than "." Within each domain name each person has complete authority as they do now with standard dns, but without, none.
So, in our example above, some jackass could go on
to register mars.my.firm, venus.my,firm, etc., but these point to domains and not specific hosts, which would be resolved as mars:my.firm, venus:my.firm, etc. (a colon probably isn't the best example here, but dashes are out and nothing else springs directly to mind. Maybe commas?)
I don't know if this is at all workable, but it seems to be a better solution than the centralized system we have now with all of its abuses and centers of authority, while still preserving much of the performance gain in a heiarchical system.
What do you think?
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Which you can access through this convenient link.
Of course, this side-steps the issue of whether it's ethical to take someone's content for free that they are requesting you to register for.
-----
who SHOULD regulate domain names?
.tld's are recognized by the commonly used root servers.
:P
There's no reason at all for them to be so stodgily defined. BIND doesn't give a damn what domain name you use. It's a sort of artificially created monopoly, in the sense that only a small number of
I say we all just start our own root servers, and allow any tld to be posted to it.
Come on, donate some broadband to the Free The World From ICANN's Domaination! project.
--
blue
i browse at -1 because they're funnier than you are.
...but rusty has a nice policy of zapping all spammers' comments. You might not like it there :) -JD
Even granting the premise that ICANN violated their bylaws in not approving Afternic's application, so what? Since when it is the job of the federal courts to hear cases about corporate bylaws brought by outside parties, not by employees, officers or stockholders?
I wish I still had some of the auto-responders from the InterNIC when I used to be the DNS Admin for an ISP. They went like this..
.net TLD (that was the hottest TLD to get, not .com!). .orgs were limited to provable non-profit organizations. Almost any educational institution could get an .edu now they are limited to four-year or graduate schools only. I remember getting .edu TLD's for a stenography school, a technical school, a grade school and a for profit scholarship company.
:)
"Thank you for your submission. Currently, InterNIC processes over 600 domain submissions a week. Please be advised, that your registration will take up to three weeks to process. Also, there is a one domain per organization limit. Multiple registrations will be rejected"
Back then, all registrations were done by hand, (I remember Robert used to handle all of ours). Only ISP's or similar networking organizations could have a
It was very different back then.
Oh well, I used to also walk 8 miles uphill both ways in the snow in July when I was a boy...
That is a good idea! If one were to implement a Gnutella like system where there is a sort of self-healing network of interconnected nodes, all of which can search eathother. Maybe something more like freenet where the content moves towards the consumers.
There are two immediate problems with this, one technical, and one political. First the technical, because it's the most important (politics can go t hell for the moment...). The problem is that things like Round Robin DNS for server pools, and for those poor souls with dynamic IP's who still want to run a server, we need some sort of clever way to prevent this decentralized blob of servers from keeping stale name entries around. Maybe if each entry in the system got a UTC timestamp along with it's signature, and any server that had a previous copy would replace that with the new one, but it still has the capacity to stagnate. Maybe if when aquiring new links A La Gnutella, there could be some specific protocol provision for requesting at least a couple distant servers as peers to keep the average distance between any two servers small... I'm sort of sleep deprived, so i'm not sure if that would work, but how's it sound?
The political problem is trying to overcome the F.U.D. that will be kicked up by the powers that be when a system is created that cannot be 'sued' and from which names cannot be revoked because they are offensive, or because some stupid corporation is scared of them (think or the etoy-etoys ruckus...).
Oh well. *yawn*
---
Play Six Pack Man. I
The political problem is trying to overcome the F.U.D. that will be kicked up by the powers that be when a system is created that cannot be 'sued' and from which names cannot be revoked because they are offensive, or because some stupid corporation is scared of them
.us, .de, .uk, etc. remains intact even while .com, .org, .net are subverted and countless new TLDs emerge.
This FUD is easilly gotten around.
Hack Mozilla and other browsers to recognize a different prefix as html, but using the new Name Service. Perhaps something like "alt://" instead of "http://" Allow the user to define one or the other as the default.
Then, whenever someone tries to look up alt://fucktheicann.com they'll get the anti-icann site, while http://fucktheicann.com isn't resolved because the ICANN has "reserved" it. (Disclaimer, the previous example is entirely fictional, I have no idea if such a domain exists or how ICANN would respond to it if it did).
One could go a step further, in inviting all of the country code TLDs to participate in both systems, such that the integrity of
This could probably be hacked using the existing DNS system, or an improved version with better security features. Names could be given on a first come, first serve basis (automated), with no provisions for arbitration whatsoever (take it up with the other party, if you get a court order, send the police to there house, don't bother us).
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Personally, I think the Official Pr0n TLD should be .xxx. I think the pornsites would like that too, since they already try to get as many x's in their names as possible (at least, so I've heard...not that I'd know from firsthand experience...or anything...er...ahem).
I'm more concerned about only nonprofits getting .org, no companies (sorry, Hemos).
My favorite suggestion is to let each country manage their own DNS. So, say, pets.com would mean pets.com.au in Australia and pets.com.us in the USA. To get to a domain in another country, just qualify it with the ISO country code (pets.com.au would always be the same site no matter where you are). Of course, there would have to be restrictions: a country couldn't create a TLD that matched a country code.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Oper on the Nightstar
1999 will go down in history as the year your mom found out about the Internet.
and 2000 is the year that attorneys found out about it.
By "multimedia experiance" you mean "crap".
TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
Icann is absolutely right for turning down Afternic. Its companies and people like them that prevent regular people from buying domains with simple, easily remembered names.
A decent analogy would be if a person or company tried to buy all the 800/877/toll free prefixed telephone numbers that spell something, in order to resell them at a later date. Its irritating at the very least, and although IANAL, I suspect it is illegal.
I'm not a lawyer. Everything that I have read about restraint of trade is in reference to restrictive clauses in contracts and agreements. Simple refusal to do business with someone is not a restraint of trade. If you want to buy widgets from me, but I refuse because I don't like people who wear green socks, that is your tough luck.
ICANN has not rejected anybody's application. Afternic and a few others are on hold. Not granted != denied.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Can't anyone tell that the system that is currently in place just isn't working out... The Registration system needs fixing and it needs fixing fast. .sex, Map sites on .map, ISP's on .net or .isp, only real companies as .com's etc. .com
1. I agree needed are more TLD's, but they need to be logical ones. Sex sites on
2. There need to be rules and the registration services need to enforce them. aka if your not a company you don't get a
3. First come first served, end of story. If you register xxxx.yyy its yours unless there is a superior claim. ie mcdonalds.com should belong to the company, but if you register mcdonalds.fam because thats your family name no one cna take it away.
4. Trademarks mean nothing on the internet, and should not be enforcable. see above.
5. A new central authority, the current ones don't work.
6. Registration services cannot own domain names, or horde domain names that they do not use as part of their business.
7. Domain names are the property of the person who registers them, the fee is simply for the up keep of the central domain records, so your DNS server can be found.
8.Owners have the right to move to a different service if they so desire at anytime.
9. Anyone can provide registration services, just like networksolutions, register.com whatever.
10. Domain names cannot be suspended or taken away, unless you can provide a superior claim, TRADEMARKS do not count. You must simply have existed longer doing what you are doing on the internet...first come first served again.
11. You have the right to a single top level domain. If you have xxxx.yyy you cannot own xxxx.zzz as well unless it is providing entirely different content and services. This is common sense stuff, that personally i had always thought was just standard practice until I really started paying attention to internet politics.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.