Slashdot Mirror
U.S. OKs VeriSign Domain Deal
mduell writes: "The U.S. government approved a deal allowing top Internet domain registrar VeriSign to retain control of the lucrative ".com" Web addresses, the Commerce Department said Friday." ICANNwatch has a couple of stories about the deal finally reached, and the steps taken by the Commerce Department to promote competition in the DNS.
And who would get the money paid by the highest bidder? .com namespace).
Department of Commerce, I believe (since they're the ones who regulate the
But I also believe that Europeans and Japanese (and just about everybody else in the world) would not like that much.
Sure, it could go in funding for standards-promoting agencies such as IETF and W3C, but I fear that it would just be wistful thinking...
Well, real soon now we'll have seperate registries for
But i think the new regirstries will charge close to $6 as well. It's not easy to run a database of that size with zero tolerance for downtime or latency. Plus, you know, also running root DNS.
--
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
The part of Verisign that people seem to have a problem with is the Registrar. This is -not- a monopoly. If you don't like the customer service, don't use it.
The part of Verisign that is a monopoly is the Registry. This is not a part that any of you interact with, unless you work for a registrar.
Again, how is any of this bad? If you don't like the Verisign registrar, don't use it. If you don't like the registry, be happy with this deal, because it gives Verisign's registry -less- power.
--
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
There are two parts - one is the Verisign registrar, which is all 99% of the world ever interacts with. This registrar has dozens of competitors, including OpenSRS.
There's also the Verisign registry, which is what all the registrars talk to, in order to keep things in sync.
Under the old plan, Verisign could either keep control of the
Under the new plan, Verisign phases out control of the
And yes, there are strict regulations in place to keep the Verisign registry from giving special treatment to the Verisign registrar.
If you don't like the Verisign registrar, don't use it. It's not a monopoly. Only the Verisign registry is, and nobody ever complains about that.
--
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
http://www.paradigm.nu/icann/icannstage.html
The story is about them being able to retain control over the .com domain registry. So they maintain the root dns servers for it, and they are paid a fee by registrars who register domains. The concern is based on Network Solutions being a Verisign company, which could be used to their Verisigns advantage in undercutting other registrars. The article did mention that they would be audited on that though. It has nothing to do with them keeping versign.com
Not to deny the roots of the internet, but is it still appropriate that a US government body (Commerce Department) still makes these decisions? I question the right of a US body to continue to make decisions concerning what is a global resource. At the least this type of thing should go to a panel with reps from all the major countries. As we all realize by now, Corporatism appears to not only have it's roots in American society but it most strongly propelled forward by those self-same American companies.
A real shame, the vision of "the net" as held by those who created is less and less a reality every day something like this occurs..
"The second review will take place in March 2004."
Obviously they don't understand how much the Internet changes in 18 months.
Corollary to Moore's Law: The IQ of new computer owners is declining.
These kinds of things (eg, .com control) should be auctioned off to the highest bidder... you don't just "let" someone retain monopoly power. Making them compete (bid) for the rights to that power benefits everyone.
What are some better alternatives for handling domain registration, other than having a corporation in charge?
Originally, universities were the keepers of such things. A not-for-profit such as IEEE, ACM, or even The Verisign Foundation would be able to handle the job. (The last is a made-up name, although I would not at all be surprised to hear that Verisign has such a philanthropic arm.)
The military-industry complex is more used to for-profit companies taking on these function -- it makes it easier to sue for damages if the contracted company doesn't do the job. Unfortunately, the Dept. of Commerce doesn't have an effective and measurable performance clause in the contracts...
People complain about the monsterously huge companies that manage the DNS infastructure. Well, let's face it, what small company could manage this? There is a minimum efficient scale associated with management of a system like DNS TLDs. The propogation delays introduced by distribution of registrars was bad enough. I'm not a proponant of allowing a single company to manage the system, nor am I a proponant of big government in general, but there are certain things that lend themselves to centralized management. TLDs are examples of such things. Greater overall value to the public is derived from efficient centralized management.
There certainly does need to be oversight and this solution seems to adress that issue.
--CTH
--
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
On the contrary, that's exactly what people have been complaining about. Most everyone on this thread knows that there are a lot of competing registrars-- you didn't point this out for the first time. The monopoly is with the registry, and that's what this whole discussion has been about (what did you think people were complaining about??)
Verisign makes a lot of money off of the registry, and every registrar has to pay for it. The problem most people have with the decision is the back-room nature of the deal. This is a public resource, yet it has been granted to a single for-profit company for a large number of years (by Internet standards), with very little room for public comment.
In any case, to say "there are lots of competing registrars, so customers are never going to suffer as a result of the Verisign monopoly" does not an argument make. You could as easily say "there are lots of competing DSL providers, so customers aren't going to suffer because Verizon owns all the lines."
It reminds me how Presidnet Lincoln responded when he told about confederate spies in his government. He said:
Sometimes I wish I could just have my illusions back that at least some things are done fairly and justly, that someone with power cares about the rights of people who cannot reward him, that the tree isn't completely hollow.
-----------------------
-----------------------
Stay in school, kids! Peace out, Dubya