Slashdot Mirror


The Internet Society Will Manage .org

ahpeterson writes "The ICANN board just decided to hand control of the .org domain over to the Internet Society. You can read more about their bid here. Whee, no more VeriSign in .org!"

15 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. no more reminders? by whoppo · · Score: 5, Funny

    So... with VeriSign out of the .org biz, who will send me "domain renewal" reminders 11 months before my .org domains are due to expire?

    --
    chown -R us /base
    1. Re:no more reminders? by whoppo · · Score: 5, Funny

      But VeriSign is kind enough to send me reminders for ALL of my domains.. even the ones registered elsewhere.. They're so nice :)

      --
      chown -R us /base
  2. Verisign still in it by rczyzewski · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "VeriSign will continue to profit from .org as it owns a small interest in the company that will run the back end of the database for the Internet Society."

    Do you think Verisign is really out of it? I doubt it if they have a financial stake in the Internet Society's future decisions. I'll be curious how Verisign tries to slowly gain more and more authority in the background.

  3. Re:My .org by AndyS · · Score: 5, Informative

    In the article it points out that you will still be able to use your domain even if you are commercial.

    " While the domain will be marketed to nonprofits, others will not be prohibited from registering .org names."

    HTH

  4. Yay, the evil spreads! by HackHackBoom · · Score: 5, Funny

    ICANN is like the US Government: Give it jurisdiction over something and it appoints a commity to discuss the feasability of appointing a subcommity to plan the eventual migration to a senate panel on how to properly disperse the powers to multiple groups and organizations that should control the board that appoints the group.....

    I love America...

    --


    "It's not stealing if you don't get caught!"

  5. why the exclamation mark? by I+Want+GNU! · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't quite understand this. Why does the article sound so upbeat and happy? In this article, user timothy writes "mesozoic points out that ISOC is a non-profit organization composed of many for-profit heavyweights, writing "ICANN has issued a report recommending that ISOC run the .org TLD... ISOC is a non-profit organization composed of many for-profit heavyweights, writing "I'm not surprised; are you?" This preliminary report may be disappointing to those who hoped that Paul Vixie and Carl Malamud would be successful in their bid to head up .org."

    Slashdot, I never would have expected doublespeak from you! *sniff* I trusted you.

  6. Before you let the party begin by ebuck · · Score: 5, Insightful


    No more Verisign is something that many will be very, very happy about, but any "big" change in "the way things are done" often hurts before it gets better.

    Let's hope that the transition is as painless as possible.

  7. Nintendo Trouble by Trinton+Azaleth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does this mean I can repurchase n64.org, the domain which Nintendo so rudely took away from me by sending their lawyers after me, back when I was 15??

    1. Re:Nintendo Trouble by Trinton+Azaleth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ok, that was vague. That details are as follows: back then I was a big fan of Nintendo, and paid using my own money to get the domain and have fun telling people how great the N64 was. I made a great site, and never got paid a dime for it. And I made it clear my site was not affiliated with Nintendo. So how did they repay me? They threatened to sue me unless I freely GAVE them my domain. I said no way, and sent letters back to their lawyers, considering my dad is a lawyer. Eventually they realize they couldn't TAKE my domain, since I registered my domain before they registered their trademark... so I decided to sell it to them for a rip off price of $50 because I was no longer interested in supporting Nintendo at that point. I was a non-profit individual having fun supporting a cool product. What did I get? Nothing but grief.

  8. so it's ISOC by frost22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you applaud that ?

    The ISOC proposal is a shameless money-grab. They are contracting out the actual work to .info operator AFFILIAS (a privately held for profit company owned by - among others - Verisign) while grabbing a part of the revenues for whatever club activities they deem worthy.

    This is the very same ISOC that got its bid approved by an evaluation comitee which judged principial Bind developer and internet pioneer Paul Vixie and his coworkers to be technically incompetent to run a registry - ISOC should be ashamed (and refuse) to accept that approval at all !

    The whole thing is a farce....

    --
    ...and here I stand, with all my lore, poor fool, no wiser than before.
    1. Re:so it's ISOC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The ISOC proposal is a shameless money-grab. They are contracting out the actual work to .info operator AFFILIAS (a privately held for profit company owned by - among others - Verisign) while grabbing a part of the revenues for whatever club activities they deem worthy.

      Thus addressing one of the principal problems that has been facing the IETF, the lack of funding for ISOC which amongst other things funds the indemnity insurance for the IESG and Working group chairs.

      This is the very same ISOC that got its bid approved by an evaluation comitee which judged principial Bind developer and internet pioneer Paul Vixie and his coworkers to be technically incompetent to run a registry

      Well there is no way I would trust Eric Allman to run something like hotmail and he wrote sendmail. The problem with Paul's bid was that he underestimated the difference between 99.9% reliable and 99.999% reliable.

      The large registries don't use BIND and have not for many years. There is a major difference between running an enterprise scale DNS node and a registry, not least the behavior of the registrars.

      Thing is that the average Internet user is willing to pay $6 per name to get ultra-high reliability DNS service. If the DNS goes down the Internet goes down. Paul's proposal to do the job for less just did not seem like much of a bargain.

  9. The problem with ICANN... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...is that the members of the board are not elected. We're always babbling about democracy (or lack of it), and how our congressmen are paid by corporations to do their bidding.

    This is already happening with ICANN. Remember the Karl Auerbach incident?

    For all we know, this might just be a temporary measure, and that Verisign has already secured a deal which will go into effect in the future.

    Just something to think about...

  10. Re:My .org by pridkett · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, all domains were originally free to have. I think NSF used to reimburse NSI for the cost of each one. I remember back in the good ol days of domain squatting (when it cost nothing to squat because no one knew about it), the guy who had knotsberryfarm.com traded it to them for a couple of jars of jelly. Which really makes more sense then sending out rabid droves of lawyers. I mean if I had a domain that someone wanted they could be like "here, we'll give you a brand spanking new dual g4 if you give up the domain". It saves money on both sides. Of course, that's only if they had a legitimate claim on the domain. I'm not that much of a whore.

    --
    My Slashdot account is old enough to drink...
  11. slashdot.info by twisty7867 · · Score: 5, Informative

    slashdot.info is NOT in fact owned by Z-D, but by Nathaniel Wilkerson of Orem, UT. The web server randomly picks other internet sites to masquerade as. When I went, it was E! Online, a couple more refreshes later, it was CNet, and on to a few other sites. Very interesting. I know the UDRP is against slashdot's religion, but, no time like the present to get the name back from someone who's clearly using it in bad faith.

  12. ISOC proposed using PostgreSQL by tsmoke · · Score: 5, Informative
    This selection ought to be applauded as, at least according to their original plans, ISOC proposed using PostgreSQL.

    So it seems that those of us who sell PostgreSQL to client will have an easy answer for whether or not it can scale.

    talli