Forum Moderators: phranque
When VeriSign resurrects Site Finder, it plans to add a second DNS wildcard entry, called an MX wildcard, which will prevent email servers trying to send email to non-existent domains. It's also promised to offer local language variants of the site.
[theregister.co.uk...]
Have Mercy!
[zdnet.com.com...]
Enough that they can pay their lawyers fees with room to spare, me thinks.
Me, too. And it doesn't annoy me a bit ..bring it on.
And yeah, I was happy with the traffic, too.
1) With IE, you have a choice. If you don't like the Infernal Exploder, download a real browser. Anyone can do this for cost-of-download-time. With V$, there is no choice. One of the most serious concerns ICANN had (from their point of view) was the destabilizing effect of attempts to avoid the V$ behavior in order to allow genuinely innovative tools for genuinely needed services (i.e. spam control, etc.) to be implemented.
2) M$, whatever its ethical failings, is technologically irrelevant at best, but is especially irrelevant to the internet. Nobody depends on them to do anything in particular. They are free to do whatever they think will make money. For all that they say about the internet being a focus of their business, and collecting a lot of money in it, they act at the outer fringes of the internet, with no functionality that couldn't be easily replaced by low-cost or no-cost software and/or garage-based local ISP's. If the good citizens of Redmond rose up, poured acid into all the server cabinets, and hanged every single M$ lawyer, PR flack, contract employee, and even the lone tech support person -- the internet wouldn't even blink. (The millenium might even be immanentized.) If V$'s servers were smashed by mobs of, say, Chinese workers angry at being served so much capitalist -imperialist propaganda in some foreign running-dog language, the internet would be seriously impacted within a matter of hours. Significant records involving (valuable) trademarked names would be lost and would have to be painfully reconstructed. Years of litigation would ensue (have already ensued) when they mess up a single name record. Which is why....
2) Aside from consent decrees, most of which M$ has so far been able to evade, M$ has nothing resembling a contract with the government. V$ is contractually obligated to provide certain services according to certain definitions. And ICANN can sue them or cancel their contract if they don't conform to the standards.
This actually could just be a move to pump up attention and maybe stock. Did you notice the other press release today that they are selling network solutions [verisign.com]?
And?
1) VeriSign does the redirection at the DNS level which affects not only browsing but also spam filters and any other service that relies upon DNS to report whether a domain exists or not. Thus, each and every one of these services has to be rewritten to take the VeriSign redirection into account
2) MSIE does the redirection internally in IE when IE gets a domain doesn't exist response, thus there's no impact on anything else than the person using IE
it definitely means someone else is hurting because of it - it doesn't magically create extra business for everyone out of the blue.
When I get the top 5 spots in the search engines, it means someone else doesn't. Does that mean I should give up my spots?
This is business....look out for your own interests.
[edited by: amznVibe at 6:42 pm (utc) on Oct. 16, 2003]
someone else is hurting because of it - it doesn't magically create extra business for everyone out of the blue. Which means that...capitalism works.
SN
Sitefinder doesn't exist and thrive because it is a superior product that we choose to use, it is the the *only* product that we are *forced* to use (well until every major ISP binds the hell out of them).
[edited by: amznVibe at 6:49 pm (utc) on Oct. 16, 2003]
Not sure on the details, and I could be completely wrong.
-Pete
As soon as I did that I bought the .net versions of my domains (I know, I should have done that anyway.)
I don't remember the last time I misspelled a domain name, so that's another thing I don't get. Who are these mysterious people and why can't they spell?
I don't know who they are, but they and all their friends are in my logs every day!
I don't know who they are, but they and all their friends are in my logs every day!
I remember correctly, Sitefinder offers a few likely candidates for that missing domain that was typed in. Then it also offers a search window. So the traffic arriving at our sites from Sitefinder shouldn't be a waste of bandwidth.
Every little bit of competition in the search business helps if you ask me.
Because other sitefinders are still good, some are better than VeriSign and I ofcourse want the best one that runs on a PC so it doesn't take time to show the Sitefinder page itself over the net.
Anyone got more info?
And one thing I don't get, With this Sitefinder thing, Aren't VeriSign loosing their own Bandwidth? Or do they have Unlimited Bandwidth or somethin?
Sid
>got some nice traffic from sitefinder...even though it annoys me to say so...I think it's just more recognizable than the previous traffic from internet explorer (msn) or IE for Yahoo (Google) or AOL (Google) or whoever was giving options for the incorrect name. I too am getting traffic from siteblinder. But it is from obvious misspellings of my competitors names. How much am I losing when my domain is misspelled?
Me, too. And it doesn't annoy me a bit ..bring it on.
At least this time around they are giving notice.
By the way, I now no longer trust anything called Pivotal Private Equity.
I was getting straight searches, not just domain names.
