ICANN DEMANDS that Verisign stop SiteFinder within 24 hours - GoFuckYourself.com

lEricPl · 10-03-2003, 08:44 AM

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/...is-03oct03.htm

October 2003

Via E-mail and U.S. Mail

Russell Lewis
Executive Vice President, General Manager
VeriSign Naming and Directory Services
21345 Ridgetop Circle LS2-3-2
Dulles, VA 20166-6503

Re: Deployment of SiteFinder Service

Dear Rusty:

This letter is further to the advisory posted by ICANN on 19 September 2003 regarding the changes to the operation of the .com and .net Top Level Domains announced by VeriSign on 15 September 2003, and in response to your letter of 21 September 2003. These changes involved the introduction (for the first time in the .com and .net domains) of a so-called "wildcard" mechanism that changes the expected error response for Internet traffic that would otherwise have resulted in a "no domain" response, and redirects that traffic to a VeriSign-operated webpage with links to alternative choices and to a search engine.

Because of numerous indications that these unannounced changes have had very significant impacts on a wide range of Internet users and applications, ICANN on 19 September 2003 asked VeriSign to voluntarily suspend these changes, and return to the previous behavior of .com and .net, until more information could be gathered on the impact of these changes. On 21 September 2003, VeriSign refused to honor that request. In the time since then, ICANN has had further opportunity to consider the technical and practical consequences of these changes, and to evaluate whether these unilateral actions by VeriSign were consistent with its contractual obligations to ICANN.

Based on the information currently available to us, it appears that these changes have had a substantial adverse effect on the core operation of the DNS, on the stability of the Internet, and on the relevant domains, and may have additional adverse effects in the future. These effects appear to be significant, including effects on web browsing, certain email services and applications, sequenced lookup services and a pervasive problem of incompatibility with other established protocols. In addition, the responses of various persons and entities to the changes made by VeriSign may themselves adversely affect the continued effective functioning of the Internet, the DNS and the .com and .net domains. Under these circumstances, the only prudent course of action consistent with ICANN's coordination mission is to insist that VeriSign suspend these changes pending further evaluation and study, including (but certainly not limited to) the public meeting already scheduled by ICANN's Security and Stability Advisory Committee on 7 October in Washington, D.C.

In addition, our review of the .com and .net registry agreements between ICANN and VeriSign leads us to the conclusion that VeriSign?s unilateral and unannounced changes to the operation of the .com and .net Top Level Domains are not consistent with material provisions of both agreements. These inconsistencies include violation of the Code of Conduct and equal access provisions, failure to comply with the obligation to act as a neutral registry service provider, failure to comply with the Registry Registrar Protocol, failure to comply with domain registration provisions, and provision of an unauthorized Registry Service. These inconsistencies with VeriSign's obligations under the .com and .net registry agreements are additional reasons why the changes in question must be suspended pending further evaluation and discussion between ICANN and VeriSign.

Given these conclusions, please consider this a formal demand to return the operation of the .com and .net domains to their state before the 15 September changes, pending further technical, operational and legal evaluation. A failure to comply with this demand will require ICANN to take the steps necessary under those agreements to compel compliance with them.

Various press reports have quoted VeriSign representatives as being concerned about the processes by which changes in the operation of top-level domains are evaluated and approved by ICANN. I share those concerns. The introduction by registry operators of new products or services that do not threaten adverse effects to the Internet, the DNS or the top-level domains which they operate should not be impeded by unnecessary or prolonged processes. On the other hand, VeriSign, like other operators of top level domains, occupies a critical position of public trust, made even more important given the fact that it is the steward for the two largest generic top level domains. This means that VeriSign has both a legal and a practical obligation to be responsible in its actions in operating those top level domains.

To ensure that this obligation is carried out, there must be a timely, transparent and predictable process for the determination of the likelihood that a proposed change in the operation of a generic top-level domain under contract with ICANN will have significant adverse effects. To this end, I will be asking the GNSO to begin to create such a procedure, taking into particular account any comments submitted by other ICANN advisory bodies, liaisons, and constituencies. I will request the GNSO to make its recommendations no later than 15 January 2003.

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.

Given the magnitude of the issues that have been raised, and their potential impact on the security and stability of the Internet, the DNS and the .com and .net top level domains, VeriSign must suspend the changes to the .com and .net top-level domains introduced on 15 September 2003 by 6:00 PM PDT on 4 October 2003. Failure to comply with this demand by that time will leave ICANN with no choice but to seek promptly to enforce VeriSign's contractual obligations.

I look forward to VeriSign's compliance by the date specified.

Best regards,

Paul Twomey
President and CEO
ICANN

cc:
Chuck Gomes - Vice President, VeriSign Naming and Directory Services
Kevin Golden, Esq. - Senior Corporate Counsel, VeriSign, Inc.

WebTitan · 10-03-2003, 08:46 AM

about time someone put an end to this

LeeNoga · 10-03-2003, 08:47 AM

Way to much to read, will wait for the video to come out.

lEricPl · 10-03-2003, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LeeNoga
Way to much to read, will wait for the video to come out.

The title says it all dear

dougeetx · 10-03-2003, 08:48 AM

Just curious but doesn't what Verisign have done screws up the 404 error message, also?

FATPad · 10-03-2003, 08:48 AM

Good.

wargames · 10-03-2003, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LeeNoga
Way to much to read, will wait for the video to come out.

true

ytcracker · 10-03-2003, 08:51 AM

nice finally word yay

chodadog · 10-03-2003, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dougeetx
Just curious but doesn't what Verisign have done screws up the 404 error message, also?

Uhm.. yes.. That was the whole point of it.

Strife · 10-03-2003, 09:29 AM

too much to read but it's nice to finally see ICANN step up

skillfull · 10-03-2003, 09:30 AM

this is definitly a good news

Amputate Your Head · 10-03-2003, 09:33 AM

Good. About time VeriSign got bitchslapped.

http · 10-03-2003, 09:35 AM

Icann = paper tiger, can deal with third world registries and end users who have the wrong phone number on whois

Verisign = very tough, won't mind legal battles against anyone & well linked with us administration

My money is on verisign

Mike AI · 10-03-2003, 10:22 AM

This is good news.

DirectNIC was about to file papers for a lawsuit.

gornyhuy · 10-03-2003, 10:35 AM

Excellent.

Its about time ICANN actually flexed their muscles instead of letting the corporate guys run the show.

I like the ultimatum approach too..

RawAlex · 10-03-2003, 10:52 AM

ICANN should just invoice Verisign for every "unregistered" domain they are redirecting for. Not sure what the number is, but at even $5 to $7 per item, that could run up a pretty sizable "domain registration" bill.

Anyone want to bet they would drop it like a hot potato as soon as the bill came due?

Alex

WiredGuy · 10-03-2003, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike AI
This is good news.

DirectNIC was about to file papers for a lawsuit.

Why stop? GoDaddy and one other company already has over this. I say go for it, the more legal pressure they get, the faster they'll cave in my opinion.

WG

Lensman · 10-03-2003, 11:19 AM

Let's see if they comply now.

lEricPl · 10-03-2003, 12:24 PM

SiteFinder is dead.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Oct3.html

VeriSign Inc., the firm that operates a key piece of the Internet's address system, said it would temporarily shut down a new service that makes money off the typos of Web users after the Internet's oversight body threatened to take legal action against the company.

10-03-2003, 08:44 AM	#1
lEricPl Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: FL Posts: 1,062	ICANN DEMANDS that Verisign stop SiteFinder within 24 hours http://www.icann.org/correspondence/...is-03oct03.htm October 2003 Via E-mail and U.S. Mail Russell Lewis Executive Vice President, General Manager VeriSign Naming and Directory Services 21345 Ridgetop Circle LS2-3-2 Dulles, VA 20166-6503 Re: Deployment of SiteFinder Service Dear Rusty: This letter is further to the advisory posted by ICANN on 19 September 2003 regarding the changes to the operation of the .com and .net Top Level Domains announced by VeriSign on 15 September 2003, and in response to your letter of 21 September 2003. These changes involved the introduction (for the first time in the .com and .net domains) of a so-called "wildcard" mechanism that changes the expected error response for Internet traffic that would otherwise have resulted in a "no domain" response, and redirects that traffic to a VeriSign-operated webpage with links to alternative choices and to a search engine. Because of numerous indications that these unannounced changes have had very significant impacts on a wide range of Internet users and applications, ICANN on 19 September 2003 asked VeriSign to voluntarily suspend these changes, and return to the previous behavior of .com and .net, until more information could be gathered on the impact of these changes. On 21 September 2003, VeriSign refused to honor that request. In the time since then, ICANN has had further opportunity to consider the technical and practical consequences of these changes, and to evaluate whether these unilateral actions by VeriSign were consistent with its contractual obligations to ICANN. Based on the information currently available to us, it appears that these changes have had a substantial adverse effect on the core operation of the DNS, on the stability of the Internet, and on the relevant domains, and may have additional adverse effects in the future. These effects appear to be significant, including effects on web browsing, certain email services and applications, sequenced lookup services and a pervasive problem of incompatibility with other established protocols. In addition, the responses of various persons and entities to the changes made by VeriSign may themselves adversely affect the continued effective functioning of the Internet, the DNS and the .com and .net domains. Under these circumstances, the only prudent course of action consistent with ICANN's coordination mission is to insist that VeriSign suspend these changes pending further evaluation and study, including (but certainly not limited to) the public meeting already scheduled by ICANN's Security and Stability Advisory Committee on 7 October in Washington, D.C. In addition, our review of the .com and .net registry agreements between ICANN and VeriSign leads us to the conclusion that VeriSign?s unilateral and unannounced changes to the operation of the .com and .net Top Level Domains are not consistent with material provisions of both agreements. These inconsistencies include violation of the Code of Conduct and equal access provisions, failure to comply with the obligation to act as a neutral registry service provider, failure to comply with the Registry Registrar Protocol, failure to comply with domain registration provisions, and provision of an unauthorized Registry Service. These inconsistencies with VeriSign's obligations under the .com and .net registry agreements are additional reasons why the changes in question must be suspended pending further evaluation and discussion between ICANN and VeriSign. Given these conclusions, please consider this a formal demand to return the operation of the .com and .net domains to their state before the 15 September changes, pending further technical, operational and legal evaluation. A failure to comply with this demand will require ICANN to take the steps necessary under those agreements to compel compliance with them. Various press reports have quoted VeriSign representatives as being concerned about the processes by which changes in the operation of top-level domains are evaluated and approved by ICANN. I share those concerns. The introduction by registry operators of new products or services that do not threaten adverse effects to the Internet, the DNS or the top-level domains which they operate should not be impeded by unnecessary or prolonged processes. On the other hand, VeriSign, like other operators of top level domains, occupies a critical position of public trust, made even more important given the fact that it is the steward for the two largest generic top level domains. This means that VeriSign has both a legal and a practical obligation to be responsible in its actions in operating those top level domains. To ensure that this obligation is carried out, there must be a timely, transparent and predictable process for the determination of the likelihood that a proposed change in the operation of a generic top-level domain under contract with ICANN will have significant adverse effects. To this end, I will be asking the GNSO to begin to create such a procedure, taking into particular account any comments submitted by other ICANN advisory bodies, liaisons, and constituencies. I will request the GNSO to make its recommendations no later than 15 January 2003. 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. Given the magnitude of the issues that have been raised, and their potential impact on the security and stability of the Internet, the DNS and the .com and .net top level domains, VeriSign must suspend the changes to the .com and .net top-level domains introduced on 15 September 2003 by 6:00 PM PDT on 4 October 2003. Failure to comply with this demand by that time will leave ICANN with no choice but to seek promptly to enforce VeriSign's contractual obligations. I look forward to VeriSign's compliance by the date specified. Best regards, Paul Twomey President and CEO ICANN cc: Chuck Gomes - Vice President, VeriSign Naming and Directory Services Kevin Golden, Esq. - Senior Corporate Counsel, VeriSign, Inc.

10-03-2003, 08:48 AM	#5
dougeetx Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 6,163	Just curious but doesn't what Verisign have done screws up the 404 error message, also? __________________ Coming Soon! A NEW revolution in black adult social networking!

10-03-2003, 08:48 AM	#6
FATPad Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 6,693	Good. __________________ <a href="http://www.adultcontent.co.uk">Adult Content UK - Great British Content</a>

10-03-2003, 08:51 AM	#8
ytcracker stc is the greatest Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: rip sean murray Posts: 12,403	nice finally word yay __________________ www.ytcracker.com \| www.digitalgangster.com i love you

10-03-2003, 09:29 AM	#10
Strife Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 4,534	too much to read but it's nice to finally see ICANN step up __________________ Buy & Sell Ads on The Most Sexy Advertising Network on the Planet

10-03-2003, 08:46 AM	#2
WebTitan Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Western NY Posts: 5,114	about time someone put an end to this

10-03-2003, 08:47 AM	#3
LeeNoga Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Egg & Sperm Mutation Posts: 3,043	Way to much to read, will wait for the video to come out.

10-03-2003, 09:30 AM	#11
skillfull Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Quebec Calisse Posts: 4,716	this is definitly a good news __________________ mind at underdark dot cc SEO Analyst Thunder-Ball.net - Member

10-03-2003, 09:33 AM	#12
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	Good. About time VeriSign got bitchslapped. __________________ SIG TOO BIG

10-03-2003, 09:35 AM	#13
http Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 1,811	Icann = paper tiger, can deal with third world registries and end users who have the wrong phone number on whois Verisign = very tough, won't mind legal battles against anyone & well linked with us administration My money is on verisign

10-03-2003, 10:22 AM	#14
Mike AI Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Elysian Fields Posts: 3,624	This is good news. DirectNIC was about to file papers for a lawsuit. __________________ Make big money on your Domains! Why wait 40 days to get paid with the other guys? Parked.com pays the most for your traffic, and cuts checks twice a month!

10-03-2003, 10:35 AM	#15
gornyhuy Chafed. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Face Down in Pussy Posts: 18,041	Excellent. Its about time ICANN actually flexed their muscles instead of letting the corporate guys run the show. I like the ultimatum approach too.. __________________ icq:159548293

10-03-2003, 10:52 AM	#16
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	ICANN should just invoice Verisign for every "unregistered" domain they are redirecting for. Not sure what the number is, but at even $5 to $7 per item, that could run up a pretty sizable "domain registration" bill. Anyone want to bet they would drop it like a hot potato as soon as the bill came due? Alex

10-03-2003, 11:19 AM	#18
Lensman GFY Chaperone Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Adult.com Posts: 9,846	Let's see if they comply now.

10-03-2003, 12:24 PM	#19
lEricPl Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: FL Posts: 1,062	SiteFinder is dead. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Oct3.html VeriSign Inc., the firm that operates a key piece of the Internet's address system, said it would temporarily shut down a new service that makes money off the typos of Web users after the Internet's oversight body threatened to take legal action against the company.