I can only assume ICANN was co-opted by Verisign some decades ago.
.name Termination
371–380 of 546 posts
Re: .name Termination
#372It seems like the right thing they should do is discontinue new registrations but continue to honour existing ones (+ continuing to reserve any 2LD that has a 3LD registered on top). It’s a bit insane that they can decide to just terminate all existing 3LD registrations. One would hope that they’d at least continue to reserve the 2LDs for some period to avoid domain squatting, but this isn’t mentioned in the proposal…
Another thing that should be obvious and yet they refuse to do: when there is a single third-level customer for a given second-level, offer them a way to get the second level domain. I've been asking VeriSign this for 15+ years, they always said no, even if at some point they confirmed that there were no other third-level than mine under that second-level domain. They're insane and should not be in charge.
Why would they want to drop the possibility of selling some as premium domains? If they have their shells setup right they will probably be able to get a premium from some 3rd level domain owners wrongly afraid someone else is interested.
The main problem with the Internet today is that we didn't destroy ICANN when they started this TLD sell off crap. A replacement institution may have at least told Verisign a TLD they can't run transfer to someone who can meet its promises can only be destroyed.
Re: .name Termination
#37322,000 people affected. Link up and lawyer up is right. To have identity and existence taken away is a no go.
Re: .name Termination
#374I seriously wonder what ICANN is good for.
Re: .name Termination
#375This risk factor is similar to one I brought up during architectural review of an IoT company I helped to build. It's why the identity certificates our devices used were entirely disconnected from domain names, and why the discovery protocol I put together did not rely on registered domains, but could use these as an untrusted part of discovery. Domain names are leased. Things that are leased can disappear. The compa…
Can you share how the discovery worked?
Re: .name Termination
#376I can only assume somebody was asleep on the job when this scheme was approved, because the outcome is in direct contradiction to ICANN’s mission statement: > Its enduring mission is to ensure the stable, secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/about-icann Arbitrary termination of service is not stability. Enabling name hijacking is not security. The answer…
Sorry, I don't understand this rule, would someone kindly explain? I own lastname.name and use it for email only like this: firstname@lastname.name I always thought as owner of lastname.name, I'm the only one able to add subdomain.lastname.name. Is this wrong?? 1) Can anyone "buy" scam.lastname.name without my authorization on .name?? 2) Can anyone owning not.lastname.name then steal my emails going to: firstname@*.l…
> I always thought as owner of lastname.name, I'm the only one able to add subdomain.lastname.name. Is this wrong??
TFA mentions that `.name` was unique in that it sold a good amount of third-level domain names directly from the registry.
Re: .name Termination
#377Earlier quoted context omitted.
A good question. Unfortunately, all I can say is we have a solution that involves specific European countries, laws, and regulations. As I said in a previous comment, happy to share more outside of this venue, but not all details are 100% public at this point.
If your solution can't survive public scrutiny, it doesn't seem like a trustworthy solution?
We're simply choosing to build in a small group of closely aligned individuals and organizations right now. Many will become the first participants in helping run the public network across the globe. The network will launch completely in the open, including open sourcing the code. People can choose to wait until then to make their decisions or if they are particularly interested they can reach out to me about joining earlier.
Re: .name Termination
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's pretty reasonable. The percentage of email accounts Google & Microsoft terminate seems far far lower than the chance I misconfigure my email or lose my domain
I'd rather trust myself. If you walk around all day with your wallet in your pocket, it might fall out and you'll lose it. Would you like me to hold onto it for you to make sure that doesn't happen?
The reason we happily walk around with our wallets is because Big Finance and Big Government are willing to invalidate and reissue our credit cards and identity documents, maybe even help us out with the fraudulent transactions after it was stolen.
Re: .name Termination
#379From the Verisign application [0] for this change: > 2.1. What effect, if any, will the proposed service have on the life cycle of domain names? > None. There will not be any effect on the life cycle of domain names. ehhh, how is that possibly true? This change ( deleting all third level names) by definition affects the lifecycle of domain names ... by terminating them! Many years ago I wrote articles bringing attent…
Re: .name Termination
#380One of the reasons I stick with Big Email for my primary email is cases similar to this. If I host email and lose the domain one day, I’ve lost two factor on a thousand different services (the single factor on some). Big Email’s policy is to not reissue my address, should I lose it or die. The .name scenario is even worse. One domain gives you access to tens of thousands of users email. It seems like a privacy nightm…
one neat thing having your own domain lets you do is have ANY @domainyouown be sent to your inbox so this gives you unlimited email aliases. I often prefix the SOURCE of the email, like toyota@domainIown