Slashdot Mirror
Verisign Recommended to Keep .com & .net
An Anonymous SAIC Employee writes "The 'independent' company hired by ICANN to advise them on who should run the .com and .net registry has recommended that Verisign (fact sheet) should be chosen to continue to run the registry. Is it any surprise? Telcordia was owned by SAIC (Fact Sheet) during the time the study was conducted. SAIC bought Telcordia (fact sheet) (then Bellcore) in Nov. 1997 and sold it March 15, 2005. Network Solutions was bought by SAIC in 1995 and sold in 2000. Also, Telcordia worked with Verisign on the ENUM project. Is the fox guarding the hen house?"
Right. Nothing. Just checking.
You misspelled psot.
"VeriSign's clumsy, unilateral attempt to hijack the DNS space through its SiteFinder wildcard service (and its goofy FUD-filled management statements since) proves that profiteering decisions can -- and do -- endanger the Internet more than any hacker or computer attack. It also proves once again that the Internet community -- ISPs, developers, engineers, and other experts -- can come together to effectively and quickly counter corporate, not just criminal, attacks on the network infrastructure - and we owe them our thanks."
h e_net.html
http://padawan.info/web/verisign_bad_citizen_of_t
Why don't they get that diversity is a *Good* thing? Switch it up every few years, to keep these guys on their toes and not let them get too comfortable/corrupt.
Verizon? i thought the article was about Verisign??
something tells me the guy who wrote that is a champ at "5 Degrees from Kevin Bacon" :P
Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
This is the cock guarding the henhouse.
stupid filter
stupid filter
stupid filter
stupid filter
hate the filter
I'm on a road shaped like a figure eight; I'm going nowhere but I'm guaranteed to be late.
Technocrat had this story yesterday - probably have a bit more discussion about it on Slashdot, but we'll have to see about the signal-noise ratio ... ;-)
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
Why would we honestly expect any different? Anyone who actually read into the situation expected VeriSign to get the contract, and it looks as if that's what's going to happen now.
Last time I checked, .com and .net domains costed a whole 10 bucks to register.
Why all the fuss about who should administer these? Is it doing any difference if it's Big Corporation A or B?
Eureka Science News - automatically updated
I wouldn't mind this, if Verisign's contract was amended to prohibit domain-typo hijacking, and more generally, to require them to remain compatible and RFC compliant. And I would want those same contract provisions regardless of who runs .com and .net.
Doug Moen
I have written a truly remarkable program which this sig is too small to contain.
it's just no-bid contracts.
SNAFU.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
And no one cares that it was first, or that it was mispelled.
If you forget about the future, the future will forget about you.
Isn't hijacking every and any unclaimed URL for company profit while providing no public service in an organisation whose very objective is a public service reason enough?
Something tells me the submitter of this story is in violation of his NDA. Maybe he should start looking for a new employer.
Is SAIC the 'independent company'? Who's the fox? What henhouse? I'm not sure who's doing what, here.
It had numerous threatening references to the UN.
Virtually every company in the IT world is connected to each other. Its like a big stupid beowulf cluster of beaurocracy that uses IPX instead of IP for its communciation protocol.
Welcome to the techo-appalachians, where everyone is related to everyone else in some manner.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
This is just a recommendation. I have full faith that Joi Ito and the rest of the board will make the best decision when the time comes.
This is all public information. SAIC might fire him for saying negative things about them, or just for being a little wonky. But NDAs are about private information.
But...
Actually, obnoxious posing and behavior not withstanding, NetSol does in fact have the most solid infrastructure to insure solid .net and .com DNS. Yes, it's sad. But, it's true.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Why change when theres nothing wrong. Why change when Verisign hasnt done anything wrong.
This sounds like an important issue. We should fly ICANN officials to another exotic destination!
Wasn't the dot-com boom the veri sign of .NET coming in the first place?
*ducks*
Please tell me you're being facetious in your last sentence. If not, you know painfully little about the subject at hand, and would do much better to read and learn than to comment and look the fool.
unixkb.com -- articles on practical Unix issues.
because we know if someone else takes over, the internet will go down for at least a week
.org was transferred?
You mean just like it did when
Oh, wait, nevermind....
Its always interesting to see where things begin.
who else?
If there's not another option that is *much* better then the current one why bother? Keep in mind that a change like this could result in a *real* mess.
That links to a last measure site.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Google should run the TLDs.. I mean, why not? They have the servers and they basically run the internet anyways.
yesterday.. "Verisign is right up there with MS and Intuit in my list of evil corporations. All the dealings I've had with Verisign / Network Solutions as a registrar have been nothing but a huge hassle. Please get someone who we can trust. I don't use them at all any more. Godaddy is a LOT less expensive and their telephone support is nothing short of wonderful. Disclaimer: I have no financial interest in Godaddy, but I do have some 90 domains happily registered with them.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
that probablly why it was labled as off-topic
SAIC might be crazy for hens like a fox. But who is this "An Anonymous SAIC Employee"? There's Slashdot UserID like that. Sure, the facts and interpretations of this incestuous relationship stand on their own (possible) merits. But what else is going on with this Slashdot story? Are we all just being used as a propaganda market again, in another infowar between rivals for the same government contract?
--
make install -not war
I honestly find it hard to believe that a single entity can maintain control over such a large part of the Internet for so long a time; in the net's early days, a centralized domain registry might have been acceptable, being that it was a small thing and the overhead to implement anything more advanced would've outweighed the benefits. Now, though, with the Internet the size it is, I honestly think that something better needs to be in place: get rid of this central-domain-registry crap. Whoever's in charge of it--Verisign, Microsoft, even Google--is going to profiteer to some extent, simply because that is what companies do.
If you ask my opinion, a decentralized system would make much more sense here. Store addresses in a Kademlia network or something; allow anybody to register a domain name, and it'll propagate as it's accessed. With a PGP-like trust system implemented, there need not be a central registry anywhere. The only way to prevent abuse of such a large monopoly is to prevent any single entity from controlling it, and the only way to do that is to decentralize the process.
It's a fucking GNAA pop-up thing.
With little effort, the system can be modified to ask a different set of "root" servers based on some simple formula on the domain-name. Like, sum up all letters of the name and % by the number of competitors.
Then we'll be able to measure the efficiency of each contender -- number of failures, average response time, &c. and compare them.
Or am I totally wrong? Any DNS gurus here?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Links to a Last Measure troll site. If you want to hear "I look at Gay Porno!" then be sure to follow that link. You have been warned.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
First of all, there is more to domain names than just registering a name. You obviously believe in first come first serve, but the American economy is not a free economy. It has command elements to protect against fraudulent acts, malicious content, and trademark disputes. Secondly, a decentralized system only works on the merits of the people wanting it to work. Just look at Kazaa and the music war there. Most of the music is poisoned. Do we really want domain name wars when one hot-headed tech gets pissed at another group and decides to flood the DNS with garbage? Have you ever looked at the number of newsgroups that exist solely because some yucko wanted to have alt.vampire.bite.flonk.flonk.flonk? A decentralized system can easily accept additions, but they are often difficult to remove entities.
Originally, DNS was purely handled by your HOST file. The number of DNS entries is a non-trivial amount. It was centralized to help us out. After all, it is amazing that people do not charge for such a necessary service. Do not confuse in theory and in practice. In theory, the system is a good design. In practice, we have not put the political pressure to lawmakers to force DNS host to operate solely to RFCs. That is to where anger needs to be vented.
Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
Why would ICANN, the org that flogged Verisign over the Sitefinder fiasco, hire a company with ties to Verisign? I don't get it. The biggest problem getting anyone to notice is that the vast majority of the Internet population simply saw Sitefinder as a page that came up when a domain was typed in wrong. What most people don't know is that *every* unknown request for a domain was forwarded to Verisign's servers. Most disturbing in my mind (maybe because I'm an email admin) is SMTP connections went through to their servers. And if I remember correct, they accepted the entire conversation. Headers and message body. They then returned a 5xx level NDR back to the sender. They 'say' they weren't collecting data, but come on, at the very least, they had access to know good sender addresses. What corp wouldn't keep track of that goldmine of information??
Pay me big $$ and I'll happily report that Verisign should not be permitted to keep .com and .net. And I'll finish that report in world-record time!
is it just me or is the headline to this story simmilar to saying "bill gates lovers open source, because he worked with steve jobs, who loves company x, who donated to company y, who pressed a law suite aganst sco, for alleged copyright infringment, because sco is suing linux users, who it claims stole their code."?
Noone writes jokes in base 13!
that I have used both of them as registrars and found that NetSol was difficult to deal with as compared to GoDaddy. I was taking that as an indication of what kind of company they are in general. I do know the difference between the two terms.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
Perhaps that's because current competitors and bidders like, say, DeNIC and others are not really desirable from a technical, legal and political point of view?
Verisign is certainly not a good custodian for .net and .com (due to that Sitefinder debacle), but are other registry operators, at least the ones who are currently seeking to take the job, any better?
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
DeNIC? Under which jurisdiction? If they operate under German laws, some US domains will have to be purged from the registry. If ICANN, a US company, is really going down this route, they'll be submerged with law suits seeking damages. Is this really something they would want to expose themselves to?
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
Their CEO is a sociopathic liar, at least in terms of behavior norms for responsible Internet protocol maintainers.
/ 4773.html
http://blog.lextext.com/blog/_archives/2003/10/20
Virtually every company in the IT world is connected to each other. Its like a big network! Like ... the internet!
Actually I rather liked new Coke.
Mycroft
https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
.org was transferred? .org and a .com
I have two active domains.
a
guess i should look-see where the rootz reside
You are looking way too much into this.
If the 'fox' was still guarding the hen house, SAIC would never have sold them in the first place.
This is non news and quite stupid to even be listed.
If you actually check the references what you find is that Telecordia worked with VeriSign to test ENUM. Telecordia and VeriSign didn't develop ENUM - that was done by an IETF working group in which anyone could participate.
.COM and .NET (or of the root) and I don't think they should get to keep .NET. But I don't see anything wrong with VeriSign helping to test ENUM.
I don't personally think that VeriSign has served as a responsible steward of
1) Sitefinder: At the time NSI did this two doezen other cctlds did this. NSI's point was "hey, either we can all do it or nobody can". That doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
.net rebid: Have a look inside all the facilities that bid on .net and tell me you'd have picked someplace else. I dare you.
.net outside the the borders of the US. Good one.
.net names now. (Hows that funky .org whois workin out for ya?)
2)
3) Location location location: Like the US govt was gonna let
Frankly I sleep a bit more easy about my 3
Need Mercedes parts ?
:-)
That was so bad that it's actually funny as hell.
My personal favorite was the impossibility of getting them to transfer a domain I had registered, for which I was the primary contact, to another party. Then when I tired of that, I tried to simply delete the registration, and found I couldn't persuade them to do that either.
They are incompetent buffoons. The only explanation I can think of is that they must have hired all their staff from the phone company.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Um, yeah. .org was transferred years ago. The registry is managed by Afilias, and the DNS is managed by UltraDNS.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks