• Home
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Awards
  • Privacy Policy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS
TheDomains.com

Wrap Up From OTA’s New gTLD Domain Collisions Workshop: Collision Issue Is Like Y2K

October 30, 2013 by Michael Berkens

The Online Trust Alliance‘s (OTA) held a new gTLD Domain Collisions Workshop yesterday in Herndon, VA over what “many stakeholders believe there are significant risks of “domain collisions” occurring with the introduction of the new gTLD’s

The workshop ran well over 7 hours and the overriding theme is that the domain collision issue is a lot like Y2K.

Domain collisions are the result of a long-standing practice of network administrators setting up intranets (internal networks) using top level domains such as .CORP, .HOME and .HOST such that client software (browsers, email, custom software) that reaches to the DNS on the internet can be used to access internal resources and services.  The implications may be far reaching. Internal resources and services might become unavailable and sensitive requests will “leak” to the internet with the potential to be intercepted by malicious actors, the media and competitors.”

The speakers included, Former ICANN Board ChairmanPeter Dengate Thrush,  Former head of new gTLD program Kurt Pritz, Steve DelBianco, of NetChoice
Colin Strutt and Lyman Chapin of Interisle the company that prepared the collision report, Andy Simpson and Burt Kaliski, of Verisign; Sean Baseri of Neustar and Don Blumenthal of the Public Interest Registry.

The Keynote was : Lessons Learned from Y2K Risk Mitigation, by Tony Keyes

Having listened to the 7 hours on the topic I do think the domain collision issue is a lot like Y2K

Y2K you might recall, was a problem computer programmers identified that they thought would cause computers to stop working once the clock changed  on January 1, 2000.  Companies and organizations worldwide checked, fixed, and upgraded their computer systems and the Y2K wound up being largely a non-event/

The authors of the collision report clearly indicated the results of the study cited  the possible occurrence of collisions.

“We do not have,  and do not represent that we have, any real data what will actually happen in the real world when collisions happen.”

So the collision issue and all of the discussion around it is a theoretical issue, basically answering what could happen if  new gTLD’s caused a collision at the network level at the root or with Internal company servers.

“We have determined what the collisions could be, but we don’t know what the consequences will be if any, which is different than going out in the real world to see what happens when they actually occur.

We are trying to develop a policy to prevent collisions that might happen from happening and mitigate any damage from collisions if they do occur

The reference to Y2K is relevant since companies were generally unaware of the potential problems from Y2K until the alarm was sounded by computer programmers, which got the tech community and the public aware of the potential problem and then they were able to address the problem ahead of time, which made Y2K a non-event when the clock struck midnight

“Like Y2K we were’t sure anything was going to happen it might, it could, but people were made aware of it and companies jumped on it to provide  fixes for it.”

“Make them understand the problem and giving them solutions for the problem are key so companies and networks take action.”

Paul Rosenzweig, Esq from the law firm of Chertoff Group & David Fagan, Covington was on hand to tell everyone the consequences and potential liability that ICANN, new gTLD’s registries,  backend providers and even registrars might face if all new gTLD’s are allowed to go to delegation without any attempted mitigation for collisions and collisions actually occur resulting in large corporate networks to go down or existing domains to stop resolving.

To summarize Mr.Rosenzweig comments now that the collision report is out ICANN and everyone else in the food chain of likely defendants are on notice that this issue may cause damage to companies, ICANN cannot sit by without taking some action.

In the event a Fortune 500 company network infrastructure fails to work because of collision, the damages that just one company  could suffer could easily exceed all of ICANN assets.

Its a complicated issue of course which should have been addressed when ICANN first started talking about opening up the Top Level Domain space.

Obviously its a fundamental issue that should have been studied by ICANN many years ago when considering whether this  new gTLD thing a good idea and well before they accepted $185,000 from companies who applied for gTLD’s like .home and .corp which are dead in the water based on the collision report.

 

 

Filed Under: ICANN, New gTLD's

About Michael Berkens

Michael Berkens, Esq. is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheDomains.com. Michael is also the co-founder of Worldwide Media Inc. which sold around 70K domain to Godaddy.com in December 2015 and now owns around 8K domain names . Michael was also one of the 5 Judges selected for the the Verisign 30th Anniversary .Com contest.

« PhoneTracker.com Sells For $50K & GiveSmart.com For $40K on Sedo
Famous Four On .Sport Decision “We Will Rigorously Pursue All Legal Avenues To Have It Reversed” »

Comments

  1. Jeff Schneider says

    October 30, 2013 at 2:54 pm

    Hello MHB,

    Thanks for the well balanced information you always provide.

    Just as important a question may be how the addition of all these .Whatsthis? extensions additions, (Over Load Dump), to the DNS system, will effect its ability to route traffic effectively.

    Most importantly, what will be the overall Backlash from the well entrenched extensions to these .Whatsthis? competitors. Stiff Resistance ahead for the .Whatsthis? crowd should be expected. This resistance has already started and will build with time.

    Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)

  2. Michael Berkens says

    October 30, 2013 at 3:13 pm

    Jeff

    Verisign has been leading the charge in slowing the new gTLD thing up and pushing the collision issue so you are correct.

    “”Just as important a question may be how the addition of all these .Whatsthis? extensions additions, (Over Load Dump), to the DNS system, will effect its ability to route traffic effectively.””

    I agree with you.

    I always thought and you can see some of my post from over 2 years ago on this program that it should be limited to a slow rollout to make sure a system that has 22 TLD can handle 100 more much less 1,000 more

    I actually selected a doubling of the TLD for the next 3 years so 22 this year, 44 next year, 88 the third year, but they went with the 1,000 in one year deal.

    ICANN says its ok

    I have no idea not a programmer not a network guy common sense tells me they should have moved slower but…


Recent Articles

  • Sedo now offering 6 more payment options
  • NameJet/SnapNames May 2022 domain sales led by Vip.org
  • Sedo weekly domain sales led by Yachts.com

Recent Comments

  • FX on Move over Web3 hype here comes Web5
  • steven on JoeRogan.net expires closes at $52,000 at GoDaddy auctions
  • Mark Thorpe on JoeRogan.net expires closes at $52,000 at GoDaddy auctions
  • brian on JoeRogan.net expires closes at $52,000 at GoDaddy auctions
  • Cheetah Cowboy on Sedo weekly domain name sales led by Marathon.de

Polls

How Many .Web Domains Will Be Registered 1 Year After Launch

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Archives

domain name news

Copyright ©2019 TheDomains.com — Published by Worldwide Media, Inc. — Site by Nuts and Bolts Media