Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Technology

ICANN Backflips Again 94

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the dance-for-me dept.
angry tapir writes "The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has backflipped again on the process for evaluating applications for new generic top-level domains such as .bank and .lol. The proposal to evaluate applications in batches of 500 had been subject to criticism from registrars, particularly the 'digital archery' component, which would be used to determine which batch an application would be part of. Last month, ICANN scrapped digital archery altogether, and now ICANN has announced that it will seek simultaneous processing of all applications. The reason people were annoyed at the batching process was it meant that even if an application for a new domain was complete and correct, and even if a domain application was not contested by anyone else, it could end up going live years after other new TLDs did. Given it will cost over a couple of hundred grand to run a new TLD, people were upset. The whole gTLD process has been fraught with delays and security breaches."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ICANN Backflips Again

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Goodbye internet!

    It was fun while it lasted. I will happily await the arrival of your replacement, just as BBS/Gopher/eWorld/AOL had its time apparently you've had yours as well. It's truly sad to see your demise brought about by a bunch of fucking monkeys who couldn't care less about your well being, so long as they're making more money off stupid shit nobody wants or needs.

    Who's up for a nice cryptographically secure distributed DNS system that runs over IPv6?

    -AC

  • by fustakrakich (1673220) on Tuesday July 31, 2012 @12:43AM (#40825471) Journal

    What do they want, a medal?

    • by c0lo (1497653)

      What do they want, a medal?

      Nah, it's just... being for the benefit of Mr. Kite.

  • Dumb idea (Score:5, Informative)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Tuesday July 31, 2012 @12:53AM (#40825521)

    ICANN apparently can't solve one of the most basic object oriented programming problems: Namespace organization and integrity.

    There's only a couple of organizational schemes that make sense; Geographical, topical, and organizational. Of those, the third was the first used: Separating domains on the basis of their function; educational, commercial, non-commercial, and governmental. Then we tried to launch geographical, which meant that agents within the system would need to register on both basis; You'd have, for example, usairforce.gov, and airforce.us. But then ICANN botched big-time; they tried to organize based on... er, nothing. Rather than a couple hundred nodes on the root, you now have effectively an infinite number of roots.

    The results were predictable: Complete and total chaos as everyone tried to register every possible permutation of trademarks, organization names, governments -- and although the cost of running a gTLD was in the tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars (which, itself, seems rather retarded; Why does adding a name to a file containing a list cost a hundred grand?) -- there are literally hundreds of thousands of organizations and individuals with the desire and cash to do so.

    And they all threw their money at the problem at the same time. Now they're stuck because there's hundreds of millions sunk into the program, and they can't go back on the process. It's a bureaucratic cluster-fuck beyond even what our most inept governmental organizations can do.

    At this point, the entire DNS system should be scrapped and start over from scratch. But that won't happen for years and years. Eventually though, it'll have to happen... when it does, I hope they pick one organizational scheme and stick to it.

    • by c0lo (1497653)

      At this point, the entire DNS system should be scrapped and start over from scratch. But that won't happen for years and years. Eventually though, it'll have to happen... when it does, I hope they pick one organizational scheme and stick to it.

      Maybe something that roots in .bit or .p2p?

      • by fa2k (881632)

        Thanks for bringing those up, I had forgotten about them. I would have modded you up, but .bit and .p2p don't really solve the namespace problem, they just allow a different organisation (or none) to control DNS. Anyway, really cool. Here's a link to .bit, http://dot-bit.org/Main_Page [dot-bit.org] . The .p2p site seems to be down.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      But that won't happen for years and years

      You accidentally misspelled "that won't happen EVER".

    • (which, itself, seems rather retarded; Why does adding a name to a file containing a list cost a hundred grand?)

      Because, else, you would have bots registering domains for squatting, at the cheapest price offered. Since it is a race to the bottom without some sort of oversight, this is the way that keeps you from having to register myawesomecompany93282.com
      • by mwvdlee (775178)

        Exactly.
        So now only the registrars itself are able to effectively register for free, due to gaps in the regulation.
        Ever noticed that it's practically impossible to enter a 3-4 character .com domainname without hitting on one of those placeholder ad-ridden pages that offer the domain for sale?

      • We're talking about gTLDs, so wouldn't it be com.myawesomecompany93282?

        (On a related note: What is the point, anyway, of registering a gTLD unless you're going to run an absolutely massive number of domains inside it? I can sort of see this happening for MS, Apple and Google; maybe Facebook. Nobody else, really.)

        • by hairyfeet (841228)

          Well if you register the right one it could be a malware guy's wet dream. lets say you register .cpm or .cim, many people can slip up and mistype that and more importantly how many Joe Average are gonna notice that single letter typo in a link?

          So then you have Microsoft.cpm, Adobe.cpm, Amazon.cpm, see where this is going? It'd also be a good way to extort some cash out of legit businesses, such as "hey I bet you don't want us using Washingtonstate.cum for college porn do ya? Well we'll be happy to sell the

    • by Anonymous Coward

      ICANN apparently can't solve one of the most basic object oriented programming problems: Namespace organization and integrity.

      However, they have solved wonderfully well one of the most basic business problems: making a profit.

    • by dodobh (65811)

      There's only one root. A lot of domains under that root.

      However, they should just have made this open and cheap from the get go. Trademarks and other such things could have been limited to the ccTLDs only.

    • by houghi (78078)

      There's only a couple of organizational schemes that make sense; Geographical, topical, and organizational. Of those, the third was the first used: Separating domains on the basis of their function; educational, commercial, non-commercial, and governmental.

      On hindsight, that was not the wisest decision. It would have been better to ONLY use the geographical system. That would have meant no com, net and org.

      What about things like linux.org, you might ask? Well, when I look at the whois page, I see an ameri

  • .assclown (Score:4, Funny)

    by techoi (1435019) on Tuesday July 31, 2012 @01:02AM (#40825551)

    I only hope that ICANN was able to register .assclown for themselves. Anyone else getting it would be unfair.

    • by gmhowell (26755)

      I only hope that ICANN was able to register .assclown for themselves. Anyone else getting it would be unfair.

      Not so fast. Several politicians and corporate C?O's have a vested interest in that TLD.

  • by jibjibjib (889679) on Tuesday July 31, 2012 @01:52AM (#40825689) Journal

    We all know the new top-level domains (and some of the existing top-level domains) are basically a money grab and a way to force people to pay as many times as possible for their name.

    And the registrar system, which supposedly enables competition, is also just a money grab. For each top-level domain we have one registry, which is a simple database run by one organisation, but then we have a whole lot of commercial infrastructure and multiple companies around it which serve no purpose except to skim profits off the top.

    Now the problems with the new TLD registration process are starting to make ICANN and the domain industry look incompetent as well as greedy, for those of us who hadn't decided that was the case already.

    So, what can we do? I know it's been suggested and unsuccessfully tried before, but is it time someone replaced ICANN?

    People keep suggesting decentralised DNS, but I'm not convinced it's a workable solution. If there's no central authority controlling the DNS, there's nobody who can give your domain back when someone breaks into your system and steals it, or when you accidentally lose your crypto keys.

    • by louarnkoz (805588)
      ICANN was supposed to managed the legacy of Jon Postel. Instead, it is managing the interests of a coterie of Internet parasites. As the parent said, "the new top-level domains (and some of the existing top-level domains) are basically a money grab," effectively allowing the new registrars to levy taxes on trademark owners. Good old fashion blackmail, as in "nice trademark you have here, you would not want something bad to happen, like having it managed by a porn site or a competitor, what about getting som
    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by crutchy (1949900)

      People keep suggesting decentralised DNS, but I'm not convinced it's a workable solution.

      DNS isn't strictly required to access websites on the web, except for its use in the host header which helps apache pick which virtual host to serve up to you.

      HOW TO MAKE ICANN IRRELEVENT:

      1. Google (or Bing, or both) begins by indexing the current system (they most likely already have)

      2. Google tweakes their engine so that people can go to the google homepage (http://74.125.237.129 for example - out of many, which could easily be saved as a favourite in any browser), enter their search, and google

      • by jibjibjib (889679)

        This idea has many problems:

        You can't change your ISP, or renumber your network, or move your website to a different server on your network, or switch to IPv6, without making all existing links to your site invalid.

        A link can only point to a specific IP, not to a website that has multiple redundant servers with different public IPs, or a website with both IPv4 and IPv6 support.

        Anyone can create a site like (for example) http://203.0.113.135//westpac.com [203.0.113.135] , and no user can distinguish it from the 'real' westp

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I read about how "digital archery" was supposed to work. If I had read it out of context, I'd have assumed it was some sort of parody or April Fool's joke.

  • by Dagger2 (1177377) on Tuesday July 31, 2012 @02:03AM (#40825725)

    The use of "backflips" suggests they've done something wrong. Yet the summary seems to say that there were complaints about the application process, and that ICANN has responded to those complaints by improving the process -- or at least altering it so as to remove the parts that were being complained about. In fact it doesn't even have anything negative to say about the news itself, other than the headline.

    They actually listened to criticism and removed the cause of it. What more do people want of them?

    (Other than coming to their senses and aborting the whole thing, of course.)

    • Maybe that ICANN would have thought harder about what they were proposing before they proposed it? It seems that the problem was described in a one-paragraph summary, was it that ICANN was incapable of understanding that much, or was it they didn't bother thinking it through?
  • I think they need to change their name from ICANN to ICANNOT, ASAP!

  • by devent (1627873) on Tuesday July 31, 2012 @06:41AM (#40826713) Homepage

    What was the official reason from ICANN for new TLDs again?
    The current scheme don't make sense anymore anyhow, a company have to register .net, .com, .de, .org anyway to secure it's trademark. For example Disney: all TLDs redirect to the domain go.com with is registered with Disney Enterprises Inc., except .gov. So the only clasification that survived is .gov, all the others are basically the same.

    After the introduction of cTLDs, there was no purpose for the ICANN anymore, other then to ensure that each country gets one cTLD. With a cTLD each country can make their own DNS sub-tree, like .co.uk. So there would be no issue what-so-ever with the long discussed berlin domain: just make .berlin.de, .munich.de, etc. and if a US company wishes they can get also their own domain: pepse.us.

    Mark my prediction: there will be a time in the near future where the meaning of a TLD is gone and you can choose your TLD freely. That will be the final money grab of ICANN.

    Firefox already got rid of the protocol part of the URL (the http://./ [.] So why we not just get rid of the TLD part? (It's already in firefox, for http://slashdot.com/ [slashdot.com] I can just enter "slashdot" in the URL bar).

    • by AikonMGB (1013995)

      You were with me until your stupid protocol argument. DNS and TCP/IP in general are used for many more things than just HTTP requests.

      • by devent (1627873)

        Complain to the Firefox developers.

        Sorry, you think I approve to get rid of the protocol part? Maybe I was not clear, I just stated that Firefox already not showing the protocol part in the URL bar. I am not agree to that, the very first thing was I changed it to show http:/// [http] again.

  • The real reason ICANN is doing all applications simultaneously, is so that the folks in the later batches won't have an opportunity to ask for their money back when they realize that a gTLD is completely worthless.

    Here's what's going to happen: Somebody reigsters the gTLD "apple", and sets up his website at http://apple/ [apple] and his email somebody@apple. Then he finds out he gets no web traffic, because people don't type "http://" into their browsers. They just type "apple" and get the top search engine hit (ap

    • by Qzukk (229616)

      Somebody reigsters the gTLD "apple", and sets up his website at http://apple/ [apple] [apple] and his email somebody@apple

      There is no A or MX record for "com", "net","org","us","uk","info","museum","biz","mobi"... I'm going to say that none of them work that way. If anyone thought they would work that way, that's their own damn fault.

  • Why does it cost hundreds of thousands to run a tld? Is most of that just labor/marketing costs? I would assume it would just be a matter of setting up a few replicating bind servers and a basic api for buying/adding domains that could be distributed to domain brokers (GoDaddy, Moniker, etc).

    Maybe there is more involved that I think there should be?

    I'm just curious where hundreds of thousands go to launch and run a tld.

    • by Lando (9348)

      You forgot the executives golden parachute I think, that's a lot of money right there in order to have the "proper" person running the company.

Nothing is rich but the inexhaustible wealth of nature. She shows us only surfaces, but she is a million fathoms deep. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Working...