] To this extent "innovation" might not be the right word.
] What VeriSign has done is to implement a previously
] unimplemented standard. The worst I can think to say is
] that they might have notified people more ahead of time.
] They certainly did not and, in my opinion, do not need
] permission to do it. It's all about being community
] friendly, but not about rights.

The creator of RealNames shows up in support of Verisign. More totally irrational claims. I referenced one of this guys RFC's in another forum because it was an interesting technical approach to replacing DNS with a directory system. However, what is also well known is that RealNames wished to manage that directory system based on the idea that the guy with the most money shows up on the top of the list. This of course resulted in their company going nowhere because no one was interested in turning the internet into even more of a spam nightmare then it already is.

Site Finder as Starting Point for True Innovation Above DNS

] VeriSign claims to have invested $150m in two and a half
] years, but Vixie said the numbers are suspect: "They
] didn't spend $150m on the root servers, they put $150m
] into their gTLD servers... they made sure .com and .net
] were well-served, and the roots came along for the ride."

Paul Vixie responds in the press to the factual misrepresentations in last weeks abominable interview with the CEO of Verisign.

Trouble Grows at the Internet's Root - Computer Business Review

] // getsrvbyname.c -- A trivial implementation of a DNS
] // SRV [RFC2782] resolver.

Here's Bucy's code. Probably buggy. BSD license.

getsrvbyname()

]
] On October 16, 2003, VeriSign announced the sale of its
] Network Solutions (NSI) business unit three years after
] its purchase from SAIC. This is a report on the
] historical snapshot of Network Solutions and a collection
] of commentaries made in response to this event.

Some good comments here.

Reaction to VeriSign-NSI Break Up

] And those are the people who still dominate the standards
] bodies?
] They're speaking out of both sides of their mouth right
] now. It's not OK to say standards are important, unless
] we don't like someone who implemented it. And it's not OK
] to say these services at the core should not be built
] out, unless you're one of the small guys and nobody
] really cares. How do we build a commercial business with
] ground rules that seem to shift based on personal agenda
] and emotion versus any particular logical data set?

More blood boiling commentary from the people who broke the internet.

The cultural divide and the Internet's future |CNET.com

] The reason that I have over 700 BBS programs listed on
] the documentary site is not just because there were so
] many platforms to program them, but because the balance
] of the software and the hardware against the very root of
] humanity's nature is a problem, a difficulty, far deeper
] and greater than any specific issues of the moment.

Latest post from Jason Scott on the BoingBoing sidebar waxes about his big picture conclusions about the BBS scene.

Why Jason Scott doesn't run a BBS.

] We have some serious problems and we'd like to share them
] with people who are motivated by that kind of challenge.
] So, you're invited to take part in the Google Code Jam
] 2003, a programming competition that will be worthy of
] your time, your skills and your interest. To take part,
] visit: http://www.topcoder.com/googlecodejam

Google Code Jam 2003

] VeriSign also made a mistake by informing ICANN and other
] standards bodies only a few days before it launched Site
] Finder, he added. "The number one complaint, actually,
] that we heard across the board was this lack of notice,"
] Lewis said. "We do sincerely regret any inconvenience
] that the service created, notwithstanding that most of
] the concerns that we discussed today ... were largely
] addressed within a matter of days, if not hours."

In the last meeting Verisign made it clear that they had their reasons for not informing anyone about the changes and that future changes would also be made without notice. Of course, they have very little to loose by RErelease the site with notice, as everyone is aware of it at this point and we know they aren't asking permission, so they've decided to let us know. They get headlines that say "look, we're sorry" and people who aren't paying attention don't know any better.

ICANN must end Verisign's contract.

Declan gave Verisign the headline they wanted

] Crocker's questions, along with queries from Ram Mohan of
] Afilias, a domain name registrar, prompted an angry
] reaction from VeriSign representatives.
]
] Gomes said: "I'm utterly clueless about how what we've
] been talking about for the last few minutes has to do
] with security and stability"--the ICANN committee's
] mandate.
]
] Larson suggested that "you guys don't think consumers
] are relevant" and that committee members were unduly
] focused on the travails of network operators affected by
] the Site Finder changes.
]
] "We're going to have to stop this discussion and turn to
] a different venue," Larson said.

An extremely disjointed view into today's ICANN hearing, but this is the only coverage I've found. Expect more in the AM.

News: VeriSign to revive redirect service (fnord!)

] There is currently a healthy robust competitive market
] for expired domains. The WLS seeks to kill the entire
] market and allow a system devised by Network Solutions to
] decide who gets every name, and allows them to charge
] domain consumers exorbitantly for the privelege of using
] their monopoly.

Another reason to hate Verisign