http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40241-2003Oct3.html And they act like they're the victims. Amazing. "Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will accede to their request while we explore all of our options." How about a public outcry? Did you miss that part? You don't deserve a hearing. Of course, they haven't removed the wildcard yet: dig is-it-gone-yet.com. @a.gtld-servers.net. +short 64.94.110.11 -- Tim Wilde twilde@dyndns.org Systems Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Tim Wilde wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40241-2003Oct3.html
And they act like they're the victims. Amazing.
Yep, I told you so :-) I said that before this was over, Verisign would claim they were the victims and a bunch of hooligans on the West Coast "attacked" their honest and decent plans to help Internet users.
"Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will accede to their request while we explore all of our options."
Uhm, was that the same hearing Verisign didn't have prior to instigating their actions?
## On 2003-10-03 15:56 -0400 Sean Donelan typed: SD> SD> SD> > "Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down SD> > the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will SD> > accede to their request while we explore all of our options." SD> SD> Uhm, was that the same hearing Verisign didn't have prior to instigating SD> their actions? Why should they need a hearing ? IMHO the ICANN demand is only to remove the wildcard DNS pointers to the "Site Finder" service and they're completely free to point say "*.verisign.com" to their "Site Finder" (Which they're free to leave running as long as they want ;-) -- Regards, Rafi
It may not be a hearing but they can still appeal. If, during this period, further technical and operational evaluations of the changes made by VeriSign on 15 September indicate that those measures can be reinstated, or reinstated with modifications, without adverse effects, I will initiate the process to modify the .com and .net agreements to allow those changes to take place. We will use best efforts to complete these evaluations in a timely manner. If, on the other hand, these ongoing evaluations confirm the claimed adverse effects on the Internet, the DNS or the .com and .net domains that have been publicized to date, or raise new concerns of that type, those concerns will have to be resolved prior to any reintroduction of these changes. If any such concerns cannot be resolved, and VeriSign continues to seek to implement the service, it will be necessary to make recourse to the dispute resolution provisions of the two agreements. This doesn't say it WILL reappear, only that it MAY. Then again, there aren't a whole lot of modifications that can be made to "* IN A 64.94.110.11" so we'll see.. On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 10:57:04PM +0200, Rafi Sadowsky wrote:
## On 2003-10-03 15:56 -0400 Sean Donelan typed:
SD> SD> SD> > "Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down SD> > the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will SD> > accede to their request while we explore all of our options." SD> SD> Uhm, was that the same hearing Verisign didn't have prior to instigating SD> their actions?
Why should they need a hearing ?
IMHO the ICANN demand is only to remove the wildcard DNS pointers to the "Site Finder" service and they're completely free to point say "*.verisign.com" to their "Site Finder" (Which they're free to leave running as long as they want ;-)
-- Regards, Rafi
--- Wayne Bouchard web@typo.org Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/
In the immortal words of Tim Wilde (twilde@dyndns.org):
And they act like they're the victims. Amazing.
"Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will accede to their request while we explore all of our options."
What's that bit about the definiton of `chutzpah?' The parricide who throws himself on the court's mercy as an orphan? Oddly enough, ICANN gave them exactly as much of a hearing as they gave ICANN, the IETF and pretty much everyone else in the world before they foisted this abomination on us. My heart bleeds for them, really. -n ------------------------------------------------------<memory@blank.org> "Kids today only have to click a few buttons to get their porn, not go out there and shoplift porn like I did, and my father did before me, and his father before him." (--Dan Savage) <http://blank.org/memory/>----------------------------------------------
: "Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down : the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will : accede to their request while we explore all of our options." : : How about a public outcry? Did you miss that part? You don't deserve a : hearing. The public are just critics: "Critics say that VeriSign abused its monopoly power over the registries" And we're a "close-knit group" who're spouting overblown claims. Yeah, right... ;-) VeriSign also angered the close-knit group of engineers and scientists who are familiar with the technology underpinning the Internet. They say that Site Finder undermines the worldwide Domain Name System, causing e-mail systems, spam-blocking technology and other applications to malfunction. VeriSign said the claims are overblown. "There is no data to indicate the core operation of the domain name system or the stability of the Internet has been adversely affected," VeriSign's Galvin said. watta bunch of goobers! scott On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Tim Wilde wrote: : : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40241-2003Oct3.html : : And they act like they're the victims. Amazing. : : "Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down : the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will : accede to their request while we explore all of our options." : : How about a public outcry? Did you miss that part? You don't deserve a : hearing. : : Of course, they haven't removed the wildcard yet: : : dig is-it-gone-yet.com. @a.gtld-servers.net. +short : 64.94.110.11 : : -- : Tim Wilde : twilde@dyndns.org : Systems Administrator : Dynamic DNS Network Services : http://www.dyndns.org/ :
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 09:59:49 -1000 (HST) Scott Weeks <surfer@mauigateway.com> wrote:
VeriSign also angered the close-knit group of engineers and scientists who are familiar with the technology underpinning the Internet. They say that Site Finder undermines the worldwide Domain Name System, causing e-mail systems, spam-blocking technology and other applications to malfunction.
VeriSign said the claims are overblown.
"There is no data to indicate the core operation of the domain name system or the stability of the Internet has been adversely affected," VeriSign's Galvin said.
watta bunch of goobers!
Would those goobers be Versign, or the "close-knit group of engineers and scientists"? g
scott
OK, so was ANYONE on NANOG happy with a) Verisign's site finder b) How they launched it Speak up on or off list. ---Mike At 04:14 PM 03/10/2003, George Bakos wrote:
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 09:59:49 -1000 (HST) Scott Weeks <surfer@mauigateway.com> wrote:
VeriSign also angered the close-knit group of engineers and scientists who are familiar with the technology underpinning the Internet. They say that Site Finder undermines the worldwide Domain Name System, causing e-mail systems, spam-blocking technology and other applications to malfunction.
VeriSign said the claims are overblown.
"There is no data to indicate the core operation of the domain name system or the stability of the Internet has been adversely affected," VeriSign's Galvin said.
watta bunch of goobers!
Would those goobers be Versign, or the "close-knit group of engineers and scientists"?
g
scott
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 04:23:29PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
OK, so was ANYONE on NANOG happy with a) Verisign's site finder
Unfair competition, more confusions, broke a lot of stuff, etc, etc , beneficial to nobody
b) How they launched it
Here... let's change the way DNS works.. That's right, overnight. -hc -- Haesu C. TowardEX Technologies, Inc. Consulting, colocation, web hosting, network design and implementation http://www.towardex.com | haesu@towardex.com Cell: (978)394-2867 | Office: (978)263-3399 Ext. 170 Fax: (978)263-0033 | POC: HAESU-ARIN
Speak up on or off list.
---Mike
At 04:14 PM 03/10/2003, George Bakos wrote:
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 09:59:49 -1000 (HST) Scott Weeks <surfer@mauigateway.com> wrote:
VeriSign also angered the close-knit group of engineers and scientists who are familiar with the technology underpinning the Internet. They say that Site Finder undermines the worldwide Domain Name System, causing e-mail systems, spam-blocking technology and other applications to malfunction.
VeriSign said the claims are overblown.
"There is no data to indicate the core operation of the domain name system or the stability of the Internet has been adversely affected," VeriSign's Galvin said.
watta bunch of goobers!
Would those goobers be Versign, or the "close-knit group of engineers and scientists"?
g
scott
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Mike Tancsa wrote: :: OK, so was ANYONE on NANOG happy with :: a) Verisign's site finder :: b) How they launched it :: Disregarding their "implementation issues", the product is pretty good. I've actually used it to fix a few typos, etc... From an end user perspective, it's certainly better than a squid error page. -jba
jeffrey.arnold wrote:
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Mike Tancsa wrote:
:: OK, so was ANYONE on NANOG happy with :: a) Verisign's site finder :: b) How they launched it ::
Disregarding their "implementation issues", the product is pretty good. I've actually used it to fix a few typos, etc... From an end user perspective, it's certainly better than a squid error page.
But you could do that before the wildcard record and can do that after the wildcard record and verisign should be happy to do that for you. Pete
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 05:34:05PM -0400, jeffrey.arnold quacked:
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Mike Tancsa wrote:
:: OK, so was ANYONE on NANOG happy with :: a) Verisign's site finder :: b) How they launched it ::
Disregarding their "implementation issues", the product is pretty good. I've actually used it to fix a few typos, etc... From an end user perspective, it's certainly better than a squid error page.
Yeah, but this is easy for you to provide as a service to users who want it. patch your squids with the following change to src/errorpage.c: @@ -414,6 +414,7 @@ * T - UTC x * U - URL without password x * u - URL with password x + * V - URL without http method without password x * w - cachemgr email address x * z - dns server error message x */ @@ -546,6 +547,9 @@ case 'u': p = r ? urlCanonical(r) : err->url ? err->url : "[no URL]"; break; + case 'V': + p = r ? urlCanonicalStripped(r) : err->url ? err->url : "[no URL]"; + break; case 'w': if (Config.adminEmail) memBufPrintf(&mb, "%s", Config.adminEmail); And then modify errors/English/ERR_DNS_FAIL to say: <H2>Alternatives</H2> You can try to view this server through: <ul> <li> <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:%V">Google's Cache</a> <li> <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/*/%U">The Internet Archive</a> <li> <a href="http://sitefinder.verisign.com/lpc?url=%V">Use Sitefinder to search for typos for this domain</a> </ul> If you're creative, have it send them with a redirect to a local CGI script that tries obvious typos. Very simple. My users like the link to the internet archive (also modify the "could not connect" error page and others). If you just want HTML, create a framed document that auto-loads the sitefinder doc in the bottom half, and pops up your own error page in the front. I leave that as an exercise to the HTML-clued reader, but it's not very hard. -Dave -- work: dga@lcs.mit.edu me: dga@pobox.com MIT Laboratory for Computer Science http://www.angio.net/ I do not accept unsolicited commercial email. Do not spam me.
Outside of one other person on this list, I know no one else personally, so where do they come up with the "close-knit" stuff? I thought that most of the traffic I have monitored, re: this topic, has come from a very diverse and rather large group of people from all around the world who have been trying to say is that what VeriSign has done has caused problems in their area of expertise, in their businesses, and for the public in general. Also seen a lot of proof posted along with the comments..... I might also mention, I understand the technology "underpinning" the internet.... it's the attempted abuse of power by individuals and organizations like VeriSign that I can't go along with.... Allen
VeriSign also angered the close-knit group of engineers and scientists who are familiar with the technology underpinning the Internet. They say that Site Finder undermines the worldwide Domain Name System, causing e-mail systems, spam-blocking technology and other applications to malfunction.
Verisign press releases have never been about the facts. Instead it's about trying to manipulate public perception to their side. Verisign has never expressed any actual concern or even care about how much damage their actions do to the internet. Any expectation that this would change in this circumstance is an act of optimism or stupidity. I only hope that the press in question will be made aware of the truth of these matters and publish that information. Otherwise, you may be faced with a situation where the DOC asks ICANN why they caved to such a small special interest group's pressure. Owen --On Friday, October 3, 2003 15:43 -0500 Allen McRay <amcray@amcray.net> wrote:
Outside of one other person on this list, I know no one else personally, so where do they come up with the "close-knit" stuff? I thought that most of the traffic I have monitored, re: this topic, has come from a very diverse and rather large group of people from all around the world who have been trying to say is that what VeriSign has done has caused problems in their area of expertise, in their businesses, and for the public in general. Also seen a lot of proof posted along with the comments.....
I might also mention, I understand the technology "underpinning" the internet.... it's the attempted abuse of power by individuals and organizations like VeriSign that I can't go along with....
Allen
VeriSign also angered the close-knit group of engineers and scientists who are familiar with the technology underpinning the Internet. They say that Site Finder undermines the worldwide Domain Name System, causing e-mail systems, spam-blocking technology and other applications to malfunction.
VeriSign said the claims are overblown.
"There is no data to indicate the core operation of the domain name system or the stability of the Internet has been adversely affected," VeriSign's Galvin said.
LOL. VeriSign, woudl you like a copy of all the spams I got b/c your RevenueFinder (sitefinder) broke my spam filters? -hc -- Haesu C. TowardEX Technologies, Inc. Consulting, colocation, web hosting, network design and implementation http://www.towardex.com | haesu@towardex.com Cell: (978)394-2867 | Office: (978)263-3399 Ext. 170 Fax: (978)263-0033 | POC: HAESU-ARIN
watta bunch of goobers!
scott
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Tim Wilde wrote:
: : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40241-2003Oct3.html : : And they act like they're the victims. Amazing. : : "Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down : the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will : accede to their request while we explore all of our options." : : How about a public outcry? Did you miss that part? You don't deserve a : hearing. : : Of course, they haven't removed the wildcard yet: : : dig is-it-gone-yet.com. @a.gtld-servers.net. +short : 64.94.110.11 : : -- : Tim Wilde : twilde@dyndns.org : Systems Administrator : Dynamic DNS Network Services : http://www.dyndns.org/ :
"... in an attempt to assert a dubious right to regulate non-registry services." This explains everything. They don't believe the stability of com and net are in any way related to their registry duties. That quote alone should be sufficient to deny them custody of com and net.
It also imtimates that they do not believe that ICANN has any right under current legislation to monitor what actually goes into the zone file; only the way verisign behaves as a registry. The fact of the matter is that yes, there is a seperation between those two items but ICANN most deffinitely has a say in how the technical aspects can be managed. Also, once verisign made a change to the root file for it's own commercial benefit, they themselves crossed the line between registry and maintainer. On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 05:03:50PM -0400, Kevin Loch wrote:
"... in an attempt to assert a dubious right to regulate non-registry services."
This explains everything. They don't believe the stability of com and net are in any way related to their registry duties.
That quote alone should be sufficient to deny them custody of com and net.
--- Wayne Bouchard web@typo.org Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/
Scott Weeks wrote:
VeriSign also angered the close-knit group of engineers and scientists who are familiar with the technology underpinning the Internet. They say that Site Finder undermines the worldwide Domain Name System, causing e-mail systems, spam-blocking technology and other applications to malfunction.
VeriSign said the claims are overblown.
"There is no data to indicate the core operation of the domain name system or the stability of the Internet has been adversely affected," VeriSign's Galvin said.
: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40241-2003Oct3.html :
Let's see, a "malfunction" is not a "core operation" or "stability". One of the nice things about lawsuits is something called discovery. Gives a chance to get some "data". We spent thousands of dollars (probably 10s of thousands), had to handle 10 times the mail load, had our upstream links completely fill, had our mail servers completely fill, lost mail, and lost customers. Then, thanks to the yeoman BIND effort, were able to mitigate the damage, and gradually bring the mail servers back to their usual state of 30% free space. Now, using news.google.com search, it seems there are a few lawsuits. I want them to go to class action status. I want money damages! Any other operators want the same? http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&edition=us&q=lawsuit+verisign&btnG=Search+News 3rd Lawsuit Against VeriSign; Seeks Class Action Status http://www.circleid.com/article/290_0_1_0_C/ http://www.techfirm.com/v-complaint.pdf Plaintiffs bring this action both on an individual and class basis, and also on a representative basis as a private attorney general under the provisions of Section 17200 et seq. of California's Business & Professions Code, for monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2; for unfair competition and trademark dilution under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); for cyberpiracy in violation of the Anti- Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act ("ACPA"), 15 U.S.C.A. § 1125(d); for illegal interception of electronic communications in violation of Title I of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act ("ECPA"), 18 U.S.C. § 2511 et seq.; for unfair, unlawful, misleading, fraudulent and deceptive business practices in violation of California Business & Professions Code Section 17200 et seq.; and for unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to halt VeriSign's illegal acts and practices before those acts and practices further harm Plaintiffs, the class defined herein, and the general public. -- William Allen Simpson Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
I wonder if they will still present at Nanog? http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0310/dns.html - Jared On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 03:44:26PM -0400, Tim Wilde wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40241-2003Oct3.html
And they act like they're the victims. Amazing.
"Without so much as a hearing, ICANN today formally asked us to shut down the Site Finder service," said VeriSign spokesman Tom Galvin. "We will accede to their request while we explore all of our options."
How about a public outcry? Did you miss that part? You don't deserve a hearing.
Of course, they haven't removed the wildcard yet:
dig is-it-gone-yet.com. @a.gtld-servers.net. +short 64.94.110.11
-- Tim Wilde twilde@dyndns.org Systems Administrator Dynamic DNS Network Services http://www.dyndns.org/
-- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
JM> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 16:16:29 -0400 JM> From: Jared Mauch JM> I wonder if they will still present at Nanog? JM> JM> http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0310/dns.html Perhaps they could give away limited-edition Snubby Mail Rejector t-shirts; bonus points if the shirts include expect script or is bugged. I just may attend NANOG after all... Eddy -- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita _________________________________________________________________ DO NOT send mail to the following addresses : blacklist@brics.com -or- alfra@intc.net -or- curbjmp@intc.net Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked.
participants (18)
-
Allen McRay -
David G. Andersen -
E.B. Dreger -
George Bakos -
Haesu -
Jared Mauch -
jeffrey.arnold -
Kevin Loch -
Mike Tancsa -
Nathan J. Mehl -
Owen DeLong -
Petri Helenius -
Rafi Sadowsky -
Scott Weeks -
Sean Donelan -
Tim Wilde -
Wayne E. Bouchard -
William Allen Simpson