3 ms·

I freaked out for a second because I've owned `dvt.name` for like 15 years. `.name` is not getting terminated, so it's important to be precise here. The third-l

by dvt 23d ago

I freaked out for a second because I've owned `dvt.name` for like 15 years. `.name` is not getting terminated, so it's important to be precise here. The third-level x.y.name (where you're the `x`) is getting terminated, and the respective `y.name` domains are going to be released. Still a crappy thing for people, but it does not affect owned second-level domains.

wormius 23d ago
There should be a conflict resolution to gracefully degrade the third level to 2nd level when there is no competing name on the second level. But I didn't think about the 1st level competitors. There'd still need a mechanism to resolve that... 1. First come first serve? (e.g. whoever registered a y.name first, whether x is bob or sue is determined by the earliest registrant on record) 2. Lottery/random selection? 3. Bidding war? I think the problem is 2nd level domains who have the same name will be a problem when they find out all these other 3rd level are now expiring and can run a route to spoof? Likely wouldn't happen, but with the fuckery in the DNS that can happen... This is such a rash and weird decision to push through so quickly just because engineers find it "easier" while ignoring the implications of the move, seemingly when it comes to larger scale security. I assume there would have to be some method to prevent routing of third level domains to subdomains of two-levels... (or is that just me being a fool yet again, assuming we have competent administration of our systems).
- deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
- mulmen 23d ago
  Or just honor the deal. The only reason for doing this is Verisign’s bottom line.
- p4bl0 23d ago
  > There should be a conflict resolution to gracefully degrade the third level to 2nd level when there is no competing name on the second level. Yes. I've been asking VeriSign for this for years, and they always refused.
  - p4bl0 22d ago
    Update report: they are still categorically refusing, even for third-level customer who are alone (and have always been for 20 years) on the second-level they use. It makes no sense.
    - glub 21d ago
      Maybe their justification is that allowing anyone to reserve means they'll have to admit they're screwing the ones with conflicts? Maybe there's some legal loophole that says screwing everyone == not screwing.
- Nition 22d ago
  fraser.name does not seem to be currently registered, so it seems they could automatically give him that name, and hence solve the problem entirely. But I wonder if there might be some competing names on the third level? Like, he's neil.fraser.name, but what if there's also bob.fraser.name and they'd both very much like to keep their domains?
  - marcus_holmes 22d ago
    I think the point is that currently if anyone.fraser.name is registered, then fraser.name cannot be registered. The change that Verisign is making is to deregister all the *.fraser.name domain registrations, which will then free up fraser.name for registration. So it becomes a race to register fraser.name and the winner gets to recreate all the *.fraser.name subdomains they want, for whatever purpose they want.
    - Nition 22d ago
      I know, but what I mean is, if he's the only one that even owns anything at .fraser.name now, then it'd be easy to just automatically give him all of .fraser.name when that happens, and then he can recreate his subdomains without worrying about someone else snagging it first. But that doesn't work if someone else owns somethingelse.fraser.name, because you can't give it to both of them.
- ctippett 22d ago
  New Zealand did this when they introduced/allowed .nz registrations[1]. If you had a domain under .co.nz, .net.nz, etc, you were reserved the right to register the same name under the new TLD. If two different registrants shared the same name, a conflict resolution was put in place to adjudicate who would be allowed to register the .nz equivalent of their domain. I had/have a .net.nz and someone else owned the .co.nz. I went through the conflict resolution process and ended up being able to register the .nz. Not sure if or how other registrars manage this sort of thing, but I thought the way NZ's Domain Name Commission handled things was pretty fair and transparent. [1] https://dnc.org.nz/tools-and-services/how-do-i-2/register-a-conflicted-domain-name/ https://dnc.org.nz/tools-and-services/how-do-i-2/register-a-...
TZubiri 23d ago
I don't get the difference. If I acquire the y domain and make it work as a subdomain broker, it's the same thing no? There is no subdomain/TLD bit
- dvt 23d ago
  You are technically correct, but Verisign billed buying an x subdomain as if the y domain was part of a stable infrastructure. Which it kind of was until they decided to pull the rug.
  - chuckadams 23d ago
    Presumably Verisign is the owner of the y domain and wouldn't dare sell it off to the highest bidder...
    - megagpt1 23d ago
      [dead]
  - TZubiri 22d ago
    Is there any resource you can point towards understanding this? I'm well versed on DNS itself, so it can be a technical document. What I understand would be the following: 1- Verisign manages the TLD registry for .name (and others), which includes managing the authoritative DNS servers (as pointed to by the .name NS and A records on the root DNS servers), 2- as well as for updating the NS records of .name records it is authoritative at the request of registrars (like, say GoDaddy), which act on behalf of domain owners. 3- one or some of the domain owners, for example for fraser.name, acted as a registry themselves managing authoritative DNS servers for NS records of .fraser.name domains, these third level DNS servers being pointed to by the name. NS records. 4- Upon registration of a .name domain, verisign charged a fee, (in the case of .coms this is around 10$ currently I believe, not sure how much they charge), and ICANN charges a much lesser fee (like 20 cents). 5- Upon registration of a .fraser.name domain, the fraser.name domain owner charged a fee, and they kept the totality of that fee (potentially paying a fee to ICANN, but definitely not to verisign.) 6- Verisign issues this request, requesting registrars of second level domains (domain.tld) like GoDaddy, to stop selling third level domains of this TLD (domain.2ld.tld). This is my understanding of the situation, and in that case, verisign was not billing for the domain. This might (a bit cynically) provide a commercial motivation for the actions of verisign. It's worth noting that this is not at all a weird or shady practice, multi-level domains are the very ethos of the domain system, it's built for that, I'm not saying any domain is obligated to do that on the basis that it can, but it's not some esoteric illegal activity, it's normal.
ShakataGaNai 22d ago
Yea. Super confused. I have myname .name - so I thought that was going away. Granted I barely use it, but still it would be annoying. I didn't recall there were 3rd level domains there.
shelled 22d ago
I understood by just looking at the title and after reading what is going on I am still concerned and not for some .name domains but I've .net and .com domains. The main issue here is the way VeriSign and ICANN are operating. Unchecked, hostile, and without consequences (even the ombudsman okay the move). Someone might come along and say but you can always fight in the court - and that's the problem! Some company or entity claims one of those .net/.com domains I "use" and just gets us suspended and handed over, as someone not living in the USA I will literally be out of any option. This "then go to the court" is a very dangerous setting. We all know this but this squarely rigged to be in favour of the offenders with means and power.

by dvt 23d ago

wormius 23d ago

There should be a conflict resolution to gracefully degrade the third level to 2nd level when there is no competing name on the second level. But I didn't think about the 1st level competitors. There'd still need a mechanism to resolve that... 1. First come first serve? (e.g. whoever registered a y.name first, whether x is bob or sue is determined by the earliest registrant on record) 2. Lottery/random selection? 3. Bidding war? I think the problem is 2nd level domains who have the same name will be a problem when they find out all these other 3rd level are now expiring and can run a route to spoof? Likely wouldn't happen, but with the fuckery in the DNS that can happen... This is such a rash and weird decision to push through so quickly just because engineers find it "easier" while ignoring the implications of the move, seemingly when it comes to larger scale security. I assume there would have to be some method to prevent routing of third level domains to subdomains of two-levels... (or is that just me being a fool yet again, assuming we have competent administration of our systems).

deleted 23d ago
[deleted]
mulmen 23d ago
Or just honor the deal. The only reason for doing this is Verisign’s bottom line.
p4bl0 23d ago
> There should be a conflict resolution to gracefully degrade the third level to 2nd level when there is no competing name on the second level. Yes. I've been asking VeriSign for this for years, and they always refused.
- p4bl0 22d ago
  Update report: they are still categorically refusing, even for third-level customer who are alone (and have always been for 20 years) on the second-level they use. It makes no sense.
  - glub 21d ago
    Maybe their justification is that allowing anyone to reserve means they'll have to admit they're screwing the ones with conflicts? Maybe there's some legal loophole that says screwing everyone == not screwing.
Nition 22d ago
fraser.name does not seem to be currently registered, so it seems they could automatically give him that name, and hence solve the problem entirely. But I wonder if there might be some competing names on the third level? Like, he's neil.fraser.name, but what if there's also bob.fraser.name and they'd both very much like to keep their domains?
- marcus_holmes 22d ago
  I think the point is that currently if anyone.fraser.name is registered, then fraser.name cannot be registered. The change that Verisign is making is to deregister all the *.fraser.name domain registrations, which will then free up fraser.name for registration. So it becomes a race to register fraser.name and the winner gets to recreate all the *.fraser.name subdomains they want, for whatever purpose they want.
  - Nition 22d ago
    I know, but what I mean is, if he's the only one that even owns anything at .fraser.name now, then it'd be easy to just automatically give him all of .fraser.name when that happens, and then he can recreate his subdomains without worrying about someone else snagging it first. But that doesn't work if someone else owns somethingelse.fraser.name, because you can't give it to both of them.
ctippett 22d ago
New Zealand did this when they introduced/allowed .nz registrations[1]. If you had a domain under .co.nz, .net.nz, etc, you were reserved the right to register the same name under the new TLD. If two different registrants shared the same name, a conflict resolution was put in place to adjudicate who would be allowed to register the .nz equivalent of their domain. I had/have a .net.nz and someone else owned the .co.nz. I went through the conflict resolution process and ended up being able to register the .nz. Not sure if or how other registrars manage this sort of thing, but I thought the way NZ's Domain Name Commission handled things was pretty fair and transparent. [1] https://dnc.org.nz/tools-and-services/how-do-i-2/register-a-conflicted-domain-name/ https://dnc.org.nz/tools-and-services/how-do-i-2/register-a-...

TZubiri 23d ago

I don't get the difference. If I acquire the y domain and make it work as a subdomain broker, it's the same thing no? There is no subdomain/TLD bit

dvt 23d ago
You are technically correct, but Verisign billed buying an x subdomain as if the y domain was part of a stable infrastructure. Which it kind of was until they decided to pull the rug.
- chuckadams 23d ago
  Presumably Verisign is the owner of the y domain and wouldn't dare sell it off to the highest bidder...
  - megagpt1 23d ago
    [dead]
- TZubiri 22d ago
  Is there any resource you can point towards understanding this? I'm well versed on DNS itself, so it can be a technical document. What I understand would be the following: 1- Verisign manages the TLD registry for .name (and others), which includes managing the authoritative DNS servers (as pointed to by the .name NS and A records on the root DNS servers), 2- as well as for updating the NS records of .name records it is authoritative at the request of registrars (like, say GoDaddy), which act on behalf of domain owners. 3- one or some of the domain owners, for example for fraser.name, acted as a registry themselves managing authoritative DNS servers for NS records of .fraser.name domains, these third level DNS servers being pointed to by the name. NS records. 4- Upon registration of a .name domain, verisign charged a fee, (in the case of .coms this is around 10$ currently I believe, not sure how much they charge), and ICANN charges a much lesser fee (like 20 cents). 5- Upon registration of a .fraser.name domain, the fraser.name domain owner charged a fee, and they kept the totality of that fee (potentially paying a fee to ICANN, but definitely not to verisign.) 6- Verisign issues this request, requesting registrars of second level domains (domain.tld) like GoDaddy, to stop selling third level domains of this TLD (domain.2ld.tld). This is my understanding of the situation, and in that case, verisign was not billing for the domain. This might (a bit cynically) provide a commercial motivation for the actions of verisign. It's worth noting that this is not at all a weird or shady practice, multi-level domains are the very ethos of the domain system, it's built for that, I'm not saying any domain is obligated to do that on the basis that it can, but it's not some esoteric illegal activity, it's normal.

ShakataGaNai 22d ago

Yea. Super confused. I have myname .name - so I thought that was going away. Granted I barely use it, but still it would be annoying. I didn't recall there were 3rd level domains there.

shelled 22d ago

I understood by just looking at the title and after reading what is going on I am still concerned and not for some .name domains but I've .net and .com domains. The main issue here is the way VeriSign and ICANN are operating. Unchecked, hostile, and without consequences (even the ombudsman okay the move). Someone might come along and say but you can always fight in the court - and that's the problem! Some company or entity claims one of those .net/.com domains I "use" and just gets us suspended and handed over, as someone not living in the USA I will literally be out of any option. This "then go to the court" is a very dangerous setting. We all know this but this squarely rigged to be in favour of the offenders with means and power.