Re: [sitefinder-tech-discuss] More problem than they're worth.

[Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>]

--On Tuesday, October 7, 2003 9:20 AM -0700 Donovan Hill <alt@lazyeyez.net> 
wrote:

> Sitefinder Timeline:
>
> 1. The unilateral implementation of the wildcards in the .com and .net
> TLDs.  2. 6 hours later the change is announced on NANOG.
> 3. ICANN requests that Verisign remove the wildcards.
> 4. Verisign refuses
> 5. ICANN resorts to threatining Verisign with a breach of contract and
> cancellation of contract
> 6. Verisign capitulates -
> http://www.verisign.com/corporate/news/2003/pr_20031003.html
> 7. CNet posts a piece written by Mark McLaughlin (VP of Verisign)
> http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html?tag=nefd_acpro
>
> I think it's time that ICANN declared that Verisign's contract is more
> trouble  than its worth and just not renew it.
Not renewing it is not sufficient.  It doesn't expire for a _LONG_ time
(2006 if I recall correctly).  At this point, it is important for ICANN
to begin actively seeking a replacement contractor for the REGISTRY.
It is important that we work to change ICANN policy to require that
the REGISTRY not be allowed to operate as a REGISTRAR, and, must be
a not-for-profit entity.  Further, any entity with strong ties to a
REGISTRAR should be strongly discouraged.

As to the rest of your message, while I largely agree with it, vitriol
will not help us counter the perception that Verisign is trying to create.
Please consider the public image aspects of how you say things and try
to put forth a professional criticism based on the facts.

Thanks,

Owen