Said the flowerpot: "Oh no, not again..."
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8DEL2TO7.htm?campaign_id=apn_tech_down&chan=tc
-C
* Chris Woodfield:
Said the flowerpot: "Oh no, not again..."
Businessweek - Bloomberg?
campaign_id=apn_tech_down&chan=tc
I don't understand what VeriSign receives in return for their kowtow
(under the agreement, they basically waive any right to criticize
ICANN's role).
Two possible explanations:
* ICANN signalled a positive outcome of a future Sitefinder review
under the new process.
* ICANN promised to grant VeriSign the DNSSEC root and .ARPA
maintenance without tender (the "Root Server Management Transition
Agreement" goes into that direction; actually, the .ARPA stuff is
the interesting one).
* VeriSign has recognized that they couldn't win in court, and
suddenly want to play nice.
Businessweek - Bloomberg?
campaign_id=apn_tech_down&chan=tcI don't understand what VeriSign receives in return for their kowtow
(under the agreement, they basically waive any right to criticize
ICANN's role).
They get to continue to be .COM registry forever as new agreement
would extend to 2012 and then automatically extended further without formal process as it happened recently for .NET. They also are going
to be able to increase registry fees for .COM by 7% per year which to
put it in perspective can potentially be $2 increase 4 years from now.
Two possible explanations:
2+2=5, right? 
* william elan net:
They get to continue to be .COM registry forever as new agreement
would extend to 2012 and then automatically extended further without
formal process as it happened recently for .NET. They also are going
to be able to increase registry fees for .COM by 7% per year which to
put it in perspective can potentially be $2 increase 4 years from now.
So the deal makes indeed sense from a business perspective. Thanks.
Two possible explanations:
2+2=5, right?
Oops. 
<tongue location="cheek">
No, you got it right. The [third] option at the end, "play nice", has only
a passing association to the realm of possibility.
</tongue>
I don't understand what VeriSign receives in return for their kowtow
(under the agreement, they basically waive any right to criticize
ICANN's role).
As someone else noted, a perpetual cash cow in .COM with 7%/year
escalator clause.
* ICANN signalled a positive outcome of a future Sitefinder review
under the new process.
Nope, there's this complex process with outside experts to review any
new proposed sitefinder like thing.
* ICANN promised to grant VeriSign the DNSSEC root and .ARPA
maintenance without tender (the "Root Server Management Transition
Agreement" goes into that direction; actually, the .ARPA stuff is
the interesting one).
My reading is the opposite, ICANN will create the root zone now.
* VeriSign has recognized that they couldn't win in court, and
suddenly want to play nice.
Quite possibly and don't be silly. More concretely, they probably
decided they were unlikely to win more than this agreement gives them.
R's,
John
they get a back-door amendment to their contract, with no public process, that extends it and allows them to charge more in the future