I, in my 'just got out of bed' mood, think about trying the reinstating of the non-existent domains out. So I decide to quickly tap in some keys to check it:
http://dsfsdfsdf.com/
Omg... it's still active ! Now only it's... Spanish ? What ????
...
Only to find out it must've been a random name some isp registered to sell later on.
And because it confuses everyone, it is much better if Verisign keeps their "service" shutdown forever. This, so no laywers and people who think 404 == nxdomain can confuse the two...
You're right, but a 404 is something that everyone have seen sometimes.
Seeing that most people use IE: if the domain doesn't resolve, they will get a MSN search page.
So actually I should have registered:
wedontwantourmsnsearchpages.(com|net):=)
The time it took for all the people, who rely on a lookup to an invalid dns name to return an error, to rework their software to 'catch' this problem IS the point.
Verisign never asked themselves the question how many programs rely on that 'feature', and simply saw it as a "byproduct" of DNS names.
The protest that started after they implemented their 'service' gives a clear hint to what Verisign saw as a "byproduct" is perhaps a very important thing.
Compare these statistics, albeit they are not completely correct... :
# Number of domain names total available in the.com-domain, counting 38 possible characters (A-z,0-9,-_) and 60 characters max: 6,12373E+94
# Number of.com-domains registered to date, according to icann: 24420000
# Percentage of webpages that are *not* being 'serviced' by Verisign: 3,987767803227140000000000000000E-86 %
# Verisign thus holds and "services": 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999(etc..) % of all.com-domains
So, 99.999% of all.com-domains are invalid, meaning that a programmer could much more easily do a "if (!valid)" than an "if (valid)", providing that DNS names look up correctly...
In all the communication Verisign presented, they kept the word "temporarily" or made suggestions which imply that.
Something tells me Verisign still has some tricks up their sleeve, which includes reinstating the service after their laywers have come up with a "satisfactory answer" to ICANN's ultimatum.
Guess I shouldn't take away my wewantour404.(com|net) yet...
Slashdot Mirror
Try entering a non-existing host in your "/etc/hosts", and browsing to it...
...
Voila, you get that ""great feature"" again !
I, in my 'just got out of bed' mood, think about trying the reinstating of the non-existent domains out. So I decide to quickly tap in some keys to check it:
... Spanish ? What ????
...
http://dsfsdfsdf.com/
Omg... it's still active ! Now only it's
Only to find out it must've been a random name some isp registered to sell later on.
I'll go to bed again.....
And because it confuses everyone, it is much better if Verisign keeps their "service" shutdown forever.
This, so no laywers and people who think 404 == nxdomain can confuse the two...
You're right, but a 404 is something that everyone have seen sometimes.
:=)
Seeing that most people use IE: if the domain doesn't resolve, they will get a MSN search page.
So actually I should have registered:
wedontwantourmsnsearchpages.(com|net)
Isn't 404 much easier ?
The time it took for all the people, who rely on a lookup to an invalid dns name to return an error, to rework their software to 'catch' this problem IS the point.
.com-domain, counting 38 possible characters (A-z,0-9,-_) and 60 characters max: 6,12373E+94 .com-domains registered to date, according to icann: 24420000 .com-domains
.com-domains are invalid, meaning that a programmer could much more easily do a "if (!valid)" than an "if (valid)", providing that DNS names look up correctly...
Verisign never asked themselves the question how many programs rely on that 'feature', and simply saw it as a "byproduct" of DNS names.
The protest that started after they implemented their 'service' gives a clear hint to what Verisign saw as a "byproduct" is perhaps a very important thing.
Compare these statistics, albeit they are not completely correct... :
# Number of domain names total available in the
# Number of
# Percentage of webpages that are *not* being 'serviced' by Verisign: 3,987767803227140000000000000000E-86 %
# Verisign thus holds and "services": 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999(etc..) % of all
So, 99.999% of all
In all the communication Verisign presented, they kept the word "temporarily" or made suggestions which imply that.
Something tells me Verisign still has some tricks up their sleeve, which includes reinstating the service after their laywers have come up with a "satisfactory answer" to ICANN's ultimatum.
Guess I shouldn't take away my wewantour404.(com|net) yet...