<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[wildcard-comments] Re: VeriSign Shut Down order by Trashcan
- To: wildcard-comments@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [wildcard-comments] Re: VeriSign Shut Down order by Trashcan
- From: Daniel C / Dalbaech <dalbaech@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 04:40:42 -0500 (CDT)
- Sender: owner-wildcard-comments@xxxxxxxxx
The SiteFinder service was a DNS based wildcard. It effected EVERY
browser, every operating system.
You have the misconception that Microsoft is doing the same thing because
of their pretty 404 errors, when in actuality, it's a portion of your
browser that's redirecting you. Not a DNS entry on the internet.
That only effects certain browsers, what Verisign did effected every
browser.
What Microsoft decides to put in their code, is their decision.
In regards to Verisign...
The entire point of allowing multiple registrars to have the ability to
create domain entries was so that there could be competition. When
Verisign took it upon themselves to start this service, they stepped over
their boundries. They abused the power which was delegated to them.
Oh, that domain isn't found? Isn't Verisign a registrar, don't I see
their name on this page that I've been sent to? Why don't I use
them to register the domain?
This is what is can boil down to... Verisign (formerly Internic, now
Network Solutions) decided it would be ok to go ahead and try getting a
competitive edge, where other registrars couldn't.
If this was truly a service which would help the community, they would not
have had it in a veil of secrecy, they would not have spent millions, or
however much they supposedly spent on a project that would normally cost
not even 1 million, and then complain about it later when they get shut
down.
Yes, they're going to lose money, but not because of the development of a
service that was shutdown, but rather, them not being able to leave the
service active and gain an edge above other registrars.
In response to the lawsuits and letters from other registrars against
Verisign:
It's about time. This isn't the Internet is was a few years ago; things
have changed. We no longer have to pay outragous prices because of the
competition. We no longer have to go to ONE company for everything to do
with Names... I'm glad that other registrars are filings suits against
Verisign, and I actually hope that the Federal Trade Commission will even
look into this. If legal action can't be taken, then I believe that it
will be at the hands of the "internet community"...
Verisign said that there were surveys or market research done by
"independent third parties"... Exactly how much did you pay the
"nonbiased" marketting companies to publish the reports?
In response to your comment that ICANN is biased; it is not. The statement
that you made was somewhat flawed, for the fact that you are more than
likely using a browser made by Microsoft. If you have such a problem with
the redirect, go into Tools-Internet Options and Advanced and find out
where to turn it off. It's a local issue, not a global one. Verisign
caused a global issue, which effected everyone. Inadvertantly, this caused
issues with SPAM Filtering, Automated Webhosting Control Panels
(specifically CPanel for one), and a few other services which rely on a
NOT FOUND response from DNS...
And a "404" message actually means "file not found" not "domain not
found".
Turn off friendly HTTP error messages.
--
Daniel Carll
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|