Slashdot Mirror
Nineteen Registrars Decry ICANN Arrangement
hpcanswers writes "ICANN, the governing body for Internet domain names, recently gave VeriSign exclusive control of the top-level .com domain until 2012. Now, nineteen registrars, including GoDaddy and Network Solutions, have petitioned ICANN to reconsider on the basis that VeriSign will most likely increase registration fees. A few of the registrars have also asked the US Department of Commerce to veto the deal." From the article: "The new deal permits VeriSign to increase the price of domain name registrations by 7 per cent in four of the next six years. In the two remaining years, VeriSign will only be able to raise prices if it can show the rises are necessary for security reasons. It also gives VeriSign a presumptive right to renewal of the .com registry, on the proviso that it complies with certain aspects of the agreement."
It's like there is any good .com domains left unregistered.
LINUX ONLINE POKER: Linux Poker
Come again?
hmm... 2012 is the Mayan end date of the world...
Coincidence? I think NOT!!!
[the Internet will destroy the human race as we know it...]
There is something very unhealthy going on at ICANN, and I just can imagine any reasonable explanations other than money changing hands over riding commonsense and objectivity. I'm very disappointed in Vint Cerf, my opinion of him has lost a lot of ground over this.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
what was the last good thing that came out of exclusive control of something?
i don't care
The President and Founder of GoDaddy blogged about this a few days ago.
"The fact that this deal was approved is a loud signal that major changes are needed at ICANN. If we don't take this opportunity and step up and replace the incredibly inept leadership at ICANN, it will go a long way in providing the United Nations with the ammunition it needs to begin taking control of the Internet."
Does this mean the GoDaddy girl will finally testify before Congress, just like in the commercials?
They are selling an intangible product. There are no production, R&D, or distribution costs. I can see marketing and bandwidth charges but raising the purchase price by seven percent every four years just doesn't really add up.
So would GoDaddy have turned down the same contract offer? Would Network Solutions have turned ICANN's offer down? Would ANY registrar have turned down this offer? Sounds like a bunch of sour grapes to me...
ConsultingFair.com
UNIX, courtesy of Ma Bell.
Thus, the foundation was laid for BSD and Linux.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
There needs to be an open source project to enable free IP numbers and free domain names. What is that patch again to make my computer look at the open source DNS as root rather than the "root" servers?
There are 21 people on the board of directors.
This cult of personality crap with ICANN is just exhausting. Say something like "Vint Cerf Sell Out!" and heads nod everywhre, but if you were to say the same thing about, say Amadeu Abril i Abril, Nii Quaynor or Masanobu Katoh they wouldn't have a clue what you were talking about, but would happily drone on about how it's all a conspiracy of U.S. control blah blah blah blah blah.
That's reasonable. I mean, verisign would never do anything to violate an agreement with ICANN, right?
Mainly, I'm saying I think money changed hands in unsavory ways.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
...I was mainsly saying that doesn't make any sense to single out Vint Cerf.
Should any capitalist body gain control over domain top level domains, we may as well say goodbye to cheap hosting. This is exactly what should NEVER happen.
Well, I believe it is too late already, but when domains started costing $7 each, instead of the previous $50-$100 they were back in the 90s, the number of domains jumped way up. With that, you have tons of junk domains out there that aren't being used, or are bought up because it is so cheap to do. I don't see how raising the price at this point would do anything but put more money in VeriSign's pockets... *shrug*
Its not what it is, its something else.
Now, the present value of future money is given as FV=PV((1+i)**n). In our case:
Now, let's do the math:
$7.95=PV((1+.06)**4)
$7.95=PV(1.26247696)
PV=$7.95/1.26247696
PV=$6.29714462274226
So, you can see that Verisign is going to lose $1.65 ($7.95-6.29) on every domain registration for the next four years. Figure a million registrations per year times four years and all of a sudden you're talking real money. The kind of money losses the shareholders won't stand for! Figure the shareholders want a 10% return and it starts getting real ugly.
--
Sig monde
A note to the sarcasm impaired: I just made all of that up (well, not the TVM or math), and yes, I know it defies logic. That's the problem with precision sarcasm; you're always having to explain yourself. ;) Although, I wouldn't be surprised to find out some MBA actually believes something similar to to this line of reasoning.
...that we're still arguing about this nonsense. Who cares who the registrar is? The system works, as evidenced by years of operation, and quite frankly, how often do you have a problem with it? Unless you're a competitor who wants to get in on some of this action.
Why does network solutions object to a deal with Verisign?
http://www.icann.org/topics/vrsn-settlement/board
"First, while some opposed the new registry agreement because of the terms of the "renewal" clause, in truth, the renewal clause in the new agreement is little changed from the 2001
Greed?
Maybe they do (infact they do) but they aren't sinister about it (such as is Verisign in holding your domain for months afterward and never releasing it until you pay big bucks, with no accountability).
Not only that their service is fairly cheap, works well, and they don't lead you into deceptive marketing.
I checked the site, they have apparently been sold to Pivotal Equity Group from Verisign.
.com domains and sets up a centralized whois as per the agreement, then Verisign could monitor Whois to see which expiring domains to grab, and it can preempt even Network Solutions to grab those domains, so I NetSol has as much to lose as any other registrar.
If Verisign gets pre-emptive renewal of
Surely the world can understand that VeriSign's executives work long, hard hours around dangerous equipment, in extreme conditions, rarely having the chance to see their family let alone go shopping for a new vacation home... I think a mere 7% increase in revenue to cover their modest yearly pay increases is the least they could ask for. When you factor in the rising expenses of unlawful lobbying and buying of senators, in the face of a dwindling corrupt Republican governmental influence, it's clear they really should be free to control the prices however they see fit! /sarcasm
Move all sig!
I remember when a few years agao that Internic had a monopoly on ALL REGISTRATIONS. Many people did not like the fees it was charging. Of course, since the only way to register a domain on the Internet was to go through Internic, Internic held all of the cards, and people were forced to pay its fees. That was until some had the bright idea of starting an alternate domain name registration system. All that is (basically) needed to set up a functional alternate domain name is a number of DNS servers with large bandwidth Internet connections and some persuasion to get people and ISP's to use these DNS servers. Of course this could cause mass confusion on the Internet if DNS systems did not respect each other's name to IP mappings.
This is almost what occured before Internic gave up its monopoly on Domain registration in the 90's. I believe that what is happening is that we are seeing a re-monopolization of Internet and telecommunication. The telcos are mergering as well as many different ISP's. Once this monoplolization is completed, the small voice will once again be drowned out. Yes, there will be those in Congress who will decry this re-monoplolization, but in the end, it will still happen.
There will be token concessions by the giant telcos as well as giant ISP's that will somewhat limit the power that these entities will wield, but eventually the eneviable will happen. All of this can be prevented, but it will take more than voicing ones opinion to congress and complaining to the press. It will take work and innovation by us average Joes.
Verizon recognizes the dangers (or true competition) presented by muninets, FreeNets, FreeWans, as well as other types of networks. This is why this company is purchasing legislation in order to prevent local governments from working to set up these types of networks. Average Joes do not have the legal force required to seize land in order to install buried cables, nor do the have access to taxpayer financed cables that have already been laid. There are many miles of "dark fiber" that has been laid but never activated by the telcos for Interet infrastructure, yet the average joes does not have the legal authority to use these resources.
What the average Joe does have is the ability to research and innovate. These average Joes include amateur (ham) radio operator as well as hackers. These are the type of people who can build local local wide area networks. Even when only a hundred different computer users are connected together, a vast wealth of information can be shared with withing the network. Combine local wide aread networks or FreeWan cells with "Sneakernets", then just about all filesharing needs can be met. A box full of DVD's packed with files can be a huge chunk of information! Muninet or FreeWan cells that have limited or no connection between them can still have information relayed between them via roving computers or the proverbial sneakernet. Of course, instant messaging, fast email, and many type of rapid communication between different networks is nearly impossible without relying on cartel controlled infrastructure, this may change in the future with enough innovation. Todays technology is more than sufficient to meet nearly all filesharing needs independently from the cartels.
My FreeWan cell is set up as a mini Internet. Visit http://plaza1.net/FreeWan to get a small taste of what can be made available for little cost. If one connects to my FreeWan Cell wirelessly, that person will quickly see an introduction to the FreeWan system when a URL is typed into their web browser. I provide the DNS from the top-level on down for my little area. If this does not sound impressive, then maybe the blazing transfer speeds will.
10 Mbit per second at 0 cost will. This is the type of speed that should be made available across the United States, However, rather than being limited by technology, we are limited by the greed of the cartels.
Alternic was orginially put together t
I use New.net.
(Joking!)
God, I wish no one had ever thought it would be a good idea to have TLDs. Just make everything be the same, with one name. Then we wouldn't have all of this damn arguing about .com this, .org that. If you need to differentiate your name, just do it within the name itself. There really isn't any need to sort things according to categories.
Agreed!!
.com is a considerable part of the world commerce, but odly enough one doesn't usually see the WTO getting involved when VeriShittySign is doing it's shenanigans.
You see,
I don't want to start all that discussion on taking the net control from the US (I do believe it should be again reconsidered, though.) But maybe the international bodies should start interfering with all this crap ICANN is doing.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
That's the year I'll be eligible to retire. The day before I retire we'll probably be hit by a giant meteor that wipes out 90% of life on earth (including me).
Don't blame the Mayans, blame my shitty luck!
This sure makes me wish the Internet 2.0 were out. We have some bugfixes to take care of!
People seem to forget that -anyone- can set up their own nameservers with their own directories of domains and such. With ICANN and VeriSign fuimbling the .com TLD so badly, I have to wonder why the other registrars don't get together and make their own internet :\
~ Wizardry Dragon
Godaddy oughtta really hire Monica Lewinsky or someone similar placed nicely in the whitehouse.
(2) Obtain exclusive access to a major part of the net.
(3) Profit!!!
I wanna know how Verisign is pulling off what its pulling off right now.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
ICANN needs to be replaced. Let a truly international organization control the root servers and TLDs.
I posted this article about 3-4 weeks ago on Slashdot with the SAME information and it got rejected but this one goes through? RIDICULOUS!
I feel cheated now.
Well, he worked with Bernie Ebbers down here at Worldcom, so I suppose he learned how to be a greedy bastard from the best of them.
I patented screwing your mom. But it got revoked for "prior art."
Hello, this is Tom Tucker. This just in: companies dislike it when their competitor is given a legal monopoly. More at eleven.
Also, can a common everyday food kill you instantly? We'll tell you after sports.
PS: Knicks suck, Yankees suck, Verisign sucks.
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
Not very concerned here, I have my domain names reserved for several years to come. AFAIK, this registration is with my reigstrar, and has not been paid in advance to the registry. Part of the reason the registrars are screaming is they will have to pay more of the money I gave them to keep my name regsitered for the next several years than they were expecting. They can't raise my rate retroactively, so this cuts into their expected proffit. Sure they can raise my rates when my current payment expires (in 2016 or so) but it's the loss of money now that bothers them.
This is their own fault though - you know full well when you sign someone up with a prepaid contact that if your costs go up you will make less money. (or LOSE money) That is a risk you take in exchange for offering your customers convenience and also getting cash in hand to sit on and collect interest on for the term of the registration.
If the registrars don't like it, waaaaah. You took my money hapily, now deal with it.
On a different topic, I agree with multiple prior posters that wonder what the heck icann was thinking when they signed verisign up for this job. If that was an "impartial" decision they made, then they are apparently brain-dead.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Explain to me how it is less risky to the integrity and security of the Internet to continue to allow ICANN and Versign to manage the TLDs than it is to turn that responsibility over to the UN or Go Daddy or whomever. It seems to me that the ICANN deal is just that, one hell of a deal. I cannot imagine that if one of the race-to-zero registrars were to take over the job that we would get a decent balance of integrity, security and cost.
The last thing we all should all want is a cycle of indecision or worse, transience in management and wind up with a splintered Internet.
ICANN - Good on you for making a decision and good on you for making it long-term.
penis