RE: [ga] collisions in namespace (was gTLD Constituency)

["Jeff Field" <jfield@aaaq.com>]

Note:  This reply contains portions that have been reprinted from a personal
email with permission from the author.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JandL [mailto:jandl@jandl.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 5:52 PM
> To: Jeff Field
> Subject: RE: [ga] collisions in namespace (was gTLD Constituency)
>
> Suffice it to say that www.vitamins.biz is one of many e-commerce
> sites published under the TLD.

I checked out the site.  It appears that although vitamins.biz does indeed
get you to a site, the company is actually doing business under the name,
"bodyRight.com".  Further, if you use the bodyright.com domain name, you end
up at a site that looks identical to the vitamins.biz site.

IMHO, I would say this company has attempted to hedge or extend its
e-commerce bet by registering the vitamins.biz name in the hopes that, 1)
the alternative root .biz would be the .biz to eventually end up in the
ICANN root system, and 2) the company would then perhaps be able to utilize
a better domain name than, or an additional domain name to, bodyright.com.
In any case, it would appear obvious (to me, at least) that this is hardly a
site that will be irreparably harmed if their .biz name doesn't make it into
the ICANN root.

Any others while I have my DNS temporarily (unless I find a compelling
reason to stay) pointing to the alternate root?

> Some registrants are hoping they will be able to secure identical
> names in the ICANN .biz if it is entered into the root so they won't
> be killed by them.  Many are concerned that ICANN will "cancel"
> their registrations because they do not understand the process.
> This is where most of the damage occurs - they don't understand,
> so they panic and think we will cut them off somehow or that ICANN
> will take their names from them.

Are you the operator of the alternative root .biz registry?  I didn't know
that (I apologize for my ignorance, if that's the case.  I'm relatively new
to this list.)!  Then you of all people should certainly have known the
risks involved when you entered this business!

I have sympathy for some of your customers, the one's that registered .biz
names in your system because of the misleading copy on the registration
site.  I have *very* little sympathy for the one's that registered names
they thought might be worth something if their .biz name ever made it into
ICANN's root.  They knew what they were doing, they've taken the risk, they
may (IMO, will) lose...but that's the nature of speculation.  Some you win,
some you lose.

> The point is, though, that if you register a domain name, you rely
> on its being there.

The .biz domains that have been registered *are* there...they're visible to
the 1 or 2 percent (or whatever the number is) of the Internet users that
point their DNS to the alternate root that contains .biz.  And anyone that
registers a .biz domain name with the alternate root .biz registry should
know that...at least if the registrar or registry makes that perfectly clear
ahead of time.  And, as mentioned, I personally don't believe that is being
done (I refer this time to the website copy, "they are real domains....these
are all active domains".  NOTE: Yes, I know they are "real"; yes, I know
they are "active".  But nowhere, at least that I could find, does it state
anything to the effect that 98%, or whatever the number is, of the Internet
population is not currently set up to access websites with a .biz address.).

> Irreparable harm has been done to our registry
> since the ICANN selection, certainly.  It is  pretty easy to track the
> fall off of registrations to that time.

IMHO, it's not up to ICANN to save your business merely because one of the
risks you should have known about before going down this path might come to
fruition.  But please, keep fighting!  This is just the sort of thing that
makes life interesting.  I just wish you'd be more forthright to your
customers and potential customers by cleaning up your website copy.

> As far as substantial sites, there are many registrants who are just
> waiting before they put mega dollars into development of their sites
> due to the controversy and fear of losing their names.  ICANN has
> done considerable damage to their business plans.

Frankly, if anyone wrote a business plan based on the assumption that the
alternative root .biz would end up being placed in the ICANN root system
ought not to be writing business plans...unless, of course, this particular
risk was duly noted in the risk assessment portion of the plan.  And if it
was, well, they know/knew the risk.

Regards,

Jeff
--
jeff field
925-283-4083
jfield@aaaq.com

>
> Leah
>
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of JandL
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 12:38 PM To: ga@dnso.org;
> > > jfield@aaaq.com Cc: jandl@jandl.com Subject: RE: [ga] collisions in
> > > namespace (was gTLD Constituency)
> > <--- snip --->
> > > It appears that the basic argument is the same one that ICANN
> > > uses.  They are responsible for only "their root" and all others can
> > > do as they please.  The fallacy here is due to the fact that there
> > > is a singular name space which makes the technical argument one of
> > > fragmentation of that name space.  Once ICANN divides it with a
> > > collider, it is a done deal.  Then it's a free-for-all.
> > > Technically, there cannot be duplicates of any dn at any level in
> > > the tree.  Since the goal should be that anyone can point to any
> > > root and not have to wonder which version of a domain they will see,
> > > and that ICANN is tasked with maintaining that stability, their
> > > deliberate entry of a collider defeats that task or mandate.
> > <--- snip --->
> >
> > The statement above, "Since the goal should be that anyone can point
> > to any root and not have to wonder which version of a domain they will
> > see", got me wondering...
> >
> > Can anyone name a site, a site of substance, better yet a public
> > company, that currently operates their main business or provides their
> > main content utilizing (advertising, promoting, etc.) a domain name in
> > either .biz or .web, and *not* the .biz or .web alternative root
> > registry itself, that will be irreparably harmed if the alternative
> > root .biz or .web TLDs never make it into the ICANN root?  I'm just
> > wondering if there's anything of substance happening over there in
> > alternative root country.  Perhaps it's time to take a look?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jeff
> > --
> > jeff field
> > 925-283-4083
> > jfield@aaaq.com
> >
>
>
>

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html