A few words on VeriSign's sitefinder
Sorry for barging in to this fine mailing list like this; long time reader, first time contributor. We, as the Internet engineering community, have made a great mistake. Actually, it wasn't even one large mistake, but a series of small ones. Engineers are busy people, and most us work under the constraints of the organizational entities we serve (be it ISPs, non-internet corporates, or even non-profits). Few of us have time for politics; even fewer have the desire and motivation for politics, and those of us who do try usually end up facing a brick wall of stubbornness, lack of understanding of the underlying technical issues, or just a deaf ear. In the meanwhile however, the Internet has made its way into many homes, businesses, and organizations. Today, one can easily state that the Internet has become a social framework, a business infrastructure, and most of all, a critical global communication network. The way the Internet works affects great and many people, in great and many ways; the Internet has power - and where there is power, there are struggles to take control over that power, and exploit it. This is apparently one of the beauties of democratic capitalism (under which I will be so bold to presume many of us live). Yet, with capitalism in mind, as a society we come together and place limitations, protocols, and procedures in order to limit the extent on which a single capitalist or a corporate entity can disrupt the life, safety, and freedom of society at large for their private agenda. Most democratic capitalistic countries have strict controls over issues such as environment, business practices, and public safety (I don't think many of us would like to visit a shopping mall built with no other considerations in mind besides the cost of construction materials, as we realize some engineering principles need to be put into practice during construction for the building to be considered reasonably safe.) Our mistake is that of ignorance. With all this said, and in nothing more than my own humble opinion, I would like to bring the following to your attention: The current situation with VeriSign is unacceptable, regardless of SiteFinder (even though the former serves a good example as for *why* it is unacceptable). The DNS (applicable RFC and IETF documents) provides very clear definition of country-specific top level domains, such as ".nl", ".jp", or even ".tv". It is the full right of the governing body of each country to assign a commercial or non-commercial entity to manage the assignments of such domains in a way in which their political system sees fit. The United States of America has the '.us' top level domain for that specific purpose. Many people argue that ".com", ".net", and ".org" are of American origin (and date back to ARPAnet and DoD), this is a sensible and true argument, however - real life practice is such that those 3 top level domains are used by various internet-connected entities worldwide. There is *no reason whatsoever* the control over those entities will be in the hands of a commercial entity. They constitute an integral part of the "Internet fabric" at least as much as the TCP/IP protocol itself from the social and usability POV. They are global, and integral to the correct operation of the Internet at large. In fact, those 3 domains exist "in cyberspace"; they do not have geographic or political borders, and the management of those TLDs has to be in the hands of a non-profit organization which is interested in *technical and organizational management*, not in making a dollar. If there are (and we can all see there are, else VeriSign wouldn't have such a successful stock) dollars to be made on those top level domains, or more specifically - the .net and .com domains currently managed by VeriSign, those dollars should be contributed back to the Internet community - and used to resolve technical and organizational issues (and there are many of those, from spam to security, or even basic coordination of effort), rather than benefit a handful of capitalistic shareholders. Root servers, and the .net, .com (as well as .org) domains belong to the world now; Welcome to the global democracy, brought to you by the ability to send packets across the globe at the speed of light. We all rely on them, and their management should be done in a way appropriate for their status. There are many capable organizations worldwide which could assume such a task. ISC (previously mentioned in this context) would indeed be a fine choice as it has proven itself to be reliable and politically independent over time. I would recommend all of you to rally your organizations and companies behind you, and advocate a change toward the previously mentioned direction. Power is a dangerous thing, especially in the wrong hands. We will all suffer to different extents for many years down the line if nothing is done today to put things straight. It's time to put an end to quasi-science, quasi-politics, and power struggles in favor of strict engineering with social and technical considerations in mind. We all know it's the only way to make it right. --- David 'wEEkAY' Monosov david dot monosov at futureinquestion dot net
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, David Monosov wrote:
where there is power, there are struggles to take control over that power, and exploit it. This is apparently one of the beauties of democratic capitalism (under which I will be so bold to presume many of us live).
The United States is a republic, not a democracy. There's a huge difference. Curtis -- -- Curtis Maurand mailto:curtis@maurand.com http://www.maurand.com
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, David Monosov wrote:
where there is power, there are struggles to take control over that power, and exploit it. This is apparently one of the beauties of democratic capitalism (under which I will be so bold to presume many of us live).
The United States is a republic, not a democracy. There's a huge difference.
Are you well enough versed in the political science to define and understand the differences? If you're you'll know that there is no and never been any true democracy anywhere and republic is just one type of this political system. And in my view US can be be described as corporate republic. Meaning large companies and special interest choose and make the elite (rather then individual families as in classic republic or democracy) and use goverment to futher achieve their goals and legal and financial system to maintain control over demos and use press and other means (financial and otherwise) to that purpose. -- William Leibzon Elan Networks william@elan.net
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, william<at>elan.net wrote:
The United States is a republic, not a democracy. There's a huge difference.
Are you well enough versed in the political science to define and understand the differences? If you're you'll know that there is no and never been any true democracy anywhere and republic is just one type of this political system.
I majored in History not MIS/CS.
And in my view US can be be described as corporate republic. Meaning large companies and special interest choose and make the elite (rather then individual families as in classic republic or democracy) and use goverment to futher achieve their goals and legal and financial system to maintain control over demos and use press and other means (financial and otherwise) to that purpose.
Of course, what you describe is the what the US political system has been perverted into. This is way off topic. We can continue this off list if you wish. Curtis -- Curtis Maurand mailto:curtis@maurand.com http://www.maurand.com
Since no one else has mentioned this: http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040226/tech_verisign_2.html
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Deepak Jain wrote:
Since no one else has mentioned this:
Looks like I need to stock up on popcorn. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - jay@west.net WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 WB6RDV NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Deepak Jain wrote:
Since no one else has mentioned this:
And I'm sure ICANN will remember it for long time - right up to the point when Verisign's contracts for .com/.net management are up for renewal. -- William Leibzon Elan Networks william@elan.net
When are they up for renewal exactly? william(at)elan.net wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Deepak Jain wrote:
Since no one else has mentioned this:
And I'm sure ICANN will remember it for long time - right up to the point when Verisign's contracts for .com/.net management are up for renewal.
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Roman Volf wrote:
When are they up for renewal exactly?
November 10, 2007, according to http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-com-25may01.htm -S
Any way to speed that up? ;) John On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 03:57:12PM -0800, Scott Call wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Roman Volf wrote:
When are they up for renewal exactly? November 10, 2007, according to http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-com-25may01.htm
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, John Kinsella wrote:
When are they up for renewal exactly? November 10, 2007, according
Any way to speed that up? ;)
http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-com-25may01.htm "16. Termination ... B. In the event of termination by DOC of its Cooperative Agreement with Registry Operator pursuant to Section 1.B.8 of Amendment ___ to that Agreement, ICANN shall, after receiving express notification of that fact from DOC and a request from DOC to terminate Registry Operator as the operator of the Registry TLD, terminate Registry Operator's rights under this Agreement, and shall cooperate with DOC to facilitate the transfer of the operation of the Registry Database to a successor registry C. This Agreement may also be terminated in the by ICANN on written notice given at least forty days after the final and nonappealable occurrence of either of the following events: (i) Registry Operator: (a) is convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction of a felony or other serious offense related to financial activities, or is the subject of a determination by a court of competent jurisdiction that ICANN reasonably deems as the substantive equivalent of those offenses ; or (b) is disciplined by the government of its domicile for conduct involving dishonesty or misuse of funds of others ii) Any officer or director of Registry Operator is convicted of a felony or of a misdemeanor related to financial activities, or is judged by a court to have committed fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, or is the subject of a judicial determination that ICANN deems as the substantive equivalent of any of these" So all we need to do is either lobby us government (get to your senator or congressman; and before Verisign starts lobbying him directly) or get federal courts to convict the people at Verisign responsible for all this mess. -- William Leibzon Elan Networks william@elan.net
Scott Call wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Roman Volf wrote:
When are they up for renewal exactly?
November 10, 2007, according to http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-com-25may01.htm
-S
I think as far as Verisign is concerned, they might not be an ongoing concern in 2007, so why worry? They need to do something to get their revenues up or risk the wrath of wallstreet: http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040129/tech_verisign_earns_4.html At $6/year per domain registered, VGRS makes the lion share of money in the domain registry business for .com and .net. Yet, they are losing $20MM per last quarter (or more, they lost over 200MM in 2003) And only have about $300MM in cash . And their revenues are falling. Deepak Jain AiNET
For ICANN/Registry agreements see here: http://www.icann.org/registries/agreements.htm Specific agreements & all technical specs Verisign agreed to follow: http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/com-index.htm http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/net-index.htm And based on that Verisign rule over these tlds ends in November 2007 On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Roman Volf wrote:
When are they up for renewal exactly?
william(at)elan.net wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Deepak Jain wrote:
Since no one else has mentioned this:
And I'm sure ICANN will remember it for long time - right up to the point when Verisign's contracts for .com/.net management are up for renewal.
william@elan.net ("william(at)elan.net") writes:
... And based on that Verisign rule over these tlds ends in November 2007
no. See page 19 of: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID475281_code70168.pdf?abstrac... i think that verisign and icann are stuck with each other, in perpetuity. -- Paul Vixie
david.monosov@futureinquestion.net ("David Monosov") writes:
... Root servers, and the .net, .com (as well as .org) domains belong to the world now; Welcome to the global democracy, brought to you by the ability to send packets across the globe at the speed of light. We all rely on them, and their management should be done in a way appropriate for their status.
i tend to agree that there is a conflict of interest between the commercial providers in this sector and both (a) their own customers, as well as (b) the outside community of interest. and...
There are many capable organizations worldwide which could assume such a task. ISC (previously mentioned in this context) would indeed be a fine choice as it has proven itself to be reliable and politically independent over time.
thank you, on behalf of isc and our board, for your respectful words. but...
... Power is a dangerous thing, especially in the wrong hands.
power is dangerous thing, in any small set of hands. diversity in all things! -- Paul Vixie
participants (10)
-
Curtis Maurand
-
David Monosov
-
Deepak Jain
-
Jay Hennigan
-
John Kinsella
-
Paul Vixie
-
Roman Volf
-
Scott Call
-
william(at)elan.net
-
william<at>elan.net