.UK Announced

[simondooner]

UK Government?

Stephen – this Freedom of Information request may be helpful. It identifies who in Government Nominet believe is important.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/nominets_proposals_for_uk#incoming-329061

 

[Stephen]

UK Government responses - thanks

Thanks Mojoco (I have sent email to Alex B), GreyWing, Edwin (thanks I have a new source of info!), and Simondooner.

 

[Stephen]

UK Registrars

Trying to put together email list of people who should be made aware of the short comings of the Nominet .uk proposal.

So I can send a document to them that I have been working on, which tires to list the many flaws and consequences of the proposal as it stands.

Can anybody share with me the email addresses of senior people at the large UK registrars.

Please email me if possible at [email protected] rather than post.

Thanks.

 

[WaftyCrank]

Wouldn't it be good to get some real backlash press coverage? Maybe email some reporters at national newspapers etc. I know we've seen The Register and other online news sources cover this but no real main stream media (unless I missed it).

 

[Murray]

Wouldn't it be good to get some real backlash press coverage? Maybe email some reporters at national newspapers etc. I know we've seen The Register and other online news sources cover this but no real main stream media (unless I missed it).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19767014

BBC covered the original announcement, not seen anything since.

 

[Stephen]

Malware / virus checking

If malware/virus check was done by Nominet, some obervations;

1. it would have to be done by online check as not all webservers would allow 3rd party files on their servers
2. if accessed sites on same server it could slow down real users page downloads and create poor user experience with resulting slow down
3. if checked at night to avoid clogged internet infastructure and server loads the malware could be re-coded to ignore those requests and so not get detected
4. would it follow seo/protection 301 and 501 redirects to same site and so could overload actual site with too much traffic and theortically create a denial of service attack?
5. will it be able to check sites like ebay.uk which may have a 1 million+ pages?
6. will Nominet resources cope if there a 3rd party feed from google or news service that creates and outbreak and effects say 100,000 websites?
7. will it work on non english websites?
8. how will it provide security check on content that needs a user password like facebook or forums?
9. will it work on linux, windows and other platforms?
10. will it check alternative pages on all database driven pages?
11. will the bandwidth from Nominet be sufficient to run so many scans?
12. will it work 24/7 and will there be Nominet support to cover those hours?
13. what happens when somebody is told they have a virus and they simply put up a parked page to get a clean bill of health and then change it again once back online with a clean bill of health from Nominet?
14. what happens when a mass virus infection happens to lots of websites will the system cope?
15. will consumers stop buying and using expensive virus protection because Nominet is making things safe?
16. will they be able to pin point where the infection is and how to deal with it?
17. what about pages not linked from home page but links from other websites to hidden pages?
18. will it scan pages several times as malware and viruses hide themselves by not being fully predictable and don't infect on every visit?
19. what about mobile or tablet only viruses that detect what the user is using and only fire of when they are viewed on such devices?
20. will it work with all page types e.g. html, xhtml, pdf etc.

I wonder if Nominet took prudent action to run trial on a variety of websites and worked out they would be able to cope with the eventual volume and the many probles such a system would have to cope with?

anybody have any comments on above?

does anybody have any more observations about Nominet malware/virus scanning please?

 

[DarrenTSO]

I imagine the service would be like http://www.stopthehacker.com/ or http://sucuri.net/

 

[Whois-Search]

does anybody have any more observations about Nominet malware/virus scanning please?

Large registrars already sell malware protection with ANY hosting package:

123 Reg (StopTheHacker)
£3.49 per month / site - Scanner Lite
£8.99 per month / site - Site Scanner Pro
http://www.123-reg.co.uk/security/site-scanner/


Enom (Sitelock)
Basic $15.00/yr
Premium $45.00/yr
Enterprise $75.00/yr
http://www.enom.com/web-site-lock/default.aspx


1&1 (SiteLock)
Basic $0.99 per month
Premium $4.99 per month
http://www.1and1.com/details-hosting-sitelock


Therefore they wouldn't want to lose this monthly revenue stream on .uk only? Or would the customer buy it twice?

If Nominet did do a deal with say www.sitelock.com it would undercut its own registrars?

 

[Edwin]

As far as I understood it from the face-to-face sessions, Nominet would contract Malware scanning to an external party (possibly white labelled as their own solution) There is therefore no additional infrastructure required at their end (though a lot of Stephen's questions can be levelled at their partner just as easily as they can at Nominet themselves)

 

[Stephen]

New "What is wrong with the Nominet .uk proposal?"

Have just finished the document "What is wrong with the Nominet.uk proposal?"

It can be viewed at www.ukProposal.org.uk

Thanks to all those that contributed to the debate.

Sorry it is such a long read, but there is so much to say!

Working on a short summary for media release any ideas on that, would be helpful.

 

[Pellam123]

Well posed....

Good argument Stephen (little typo in closing statement). My (business) future is in grave jeopardy should should this whole scheme go ahead, there is no way I could win a bidding war against our multinational competitors (in my particular sector) nor face the legal costs of comprehensively pursuing Nominet for my losses - the fairest implementation of this strategy, if proven to be the right way forward would be to offer existing holders of .co.uk domains the option to 'upgrade' (using the term very loosely) to the .uk.

Legal frameworks are already sufficiently in place to protect trademark holders so theres no argument there.

As a (one time) Vodafone share holder (many moons ago) I watched the then government (Mr. Brown in particular) destroy the value of the mobile telecoms sector with the atrocious implementation of the 3G auctions. I lost my shirt on that one however was able to decorate (our then) outside WC with my worthless share certificates.

Nominet are going to be highly financially motivated to do this their way, not ours.

 

[Paullas]

Have just finished the document "What is wrong with the Nominet.uk proposal?"

It can be viewed at www.ukProposal.org.uk

Thanks to all those that contributed to the debate.

Sorry it is such a long read, but there is so much to say!

Working on a short summary for media release any ideas on that, would be helpful.

Well done Stephen.. Very interesting read.

 

[websaway]

good read, and a lot of hard work .

 

[Murray]

Forgive my ignorance.

If/when the .uk is available, will generic words be available to anyone to register? I assume they will be?.

for instance shoes.uk, building.uk, love.uk

If so, there is obviously going to be thousands of great domain names..

How much do you guys anticipate spending on new registering domains on the release date? is there going to be a gold rush? or am I missing something.

 

[Systreg]

Forgive my ignorance.

Have you not read the rest of this topic in full, or more importantly, the consultation documents from the Nominet regarding this? I'll assume you haven't, as the documents and the posts on the previous pages answer this question you posed:

If/when the .uk is available, will generic words be available to anyone to register? I assume they will be?.

for instance shoes.uk, building.uk, love.uk

If so, there is obviously going to be thousands of great domain names..

No, as per the documentation, as it currently stands (Nominet haven't fully decided yet), they will first offer .uk domain names to TM holders, once all the good domains have been mopped up by them, it will then go to those with registered and unregistered rights, such as current owners of the .co.uk, .org.uk, .me.uk versions of .UK domain names, and the .UK will go to the highest bidder.

That's if they don't decide to automatically grandfather .UK's to owners of the .co.uk's, .org.uk's or .me.uk's, then it would go to those with no rights who would all have to go to auction for anything that's left, something like that anyway, I may have left a stage out.

The consultation document is here; http://www.nominet.org.uk/sites/default/files/Nominet_FINAL_electronic_form3_0.pdf (See page 13, section titled "K. Phased release and rights management")

[edit]

This is a screen shot of that part of the document:

 

[Murray]

Have you not read the rest of this topic in full, or more importantly, the consultation documents from the Nominet regarding this? I'll assume you haven't, as the documents and the posts on the previous pages answer this question you posed:



No, as per the documentation, as it currently stands (Nominet haven't fully decided yet), they will first offer .uk domain names to TM holders, once all the good domains have been mopped up by them, it will then go to those with registered and unregistered rights, such as current owners of the .co.uk, .org.uk, .me.uk versions of .UK domain names, and the .UK will go to the highest bidder.

That's if they don't decide to automatically grandfather .UK's to owners of the .co.uk's, .org.uk's or .me.uk's, then it would go to those with no rights who would all have to go to auction for anything that's left, something like that anyway, I may have left a stage out.

The consultation document is here; http://www.nominet.org.uk/sites/default/files/Nominet_FINAL_electronic_form3_0.pdf (See page 13, section titled "K. Phased release and rights management")

I appreciate your reply and I've now read and (hopefully) understand, thanks.

Landrush will be an interesting period since there are so many domains held by domainers that have no sites on, so they go into landrush correct?.

 

[monaghan]

Landrush will be an interesting period since there are so many domains held by domainers that have no sites on, so they go into landrush correct?.

Who says the only use for a domain is to have a web site? Some of us have been around since before Sir Tim cranked out his hyper-link system that we all now know and love as web sites

 

[Edwin]

I appreciate your reply and I've now read and (hopefully) understand, thanks.

If you're playing catch-up, you'll also want to read:
http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/ukpositionpaper.pdf
http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/pros-and-cons.html
http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/trademarks.html
http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs...cs/2012/11/i-have-seen-the-online-future.html (the comment by Paul Keating)
http://econsultancy.com/nz/blog/11161-is-nominet-s-uk-proposal-a-tax-on-the-digital-economy

 

[websaway]

I appreciate your reply and I've now read and (hopefully) understand, thanks.

Landrush will be an interesting period since there are so many domains held by domainers that have no sites on, so they go into landrush correct?.

Yes you should be able to get them all, you're so sharp you'll cut yourself.

And when you've got a good .uk you won't be able to use or sell it because someone will also want to own the .co.uk and you'll be in two minds whether or not to develop them because you won't be sure the .uk will take off . But good luck anyway.

 

[Stephen]

.uk and .co.uk undeveloped sites?

..And when you've got a good .uk you won't be able to use or sell it because someone will also want to own the .co.uk and you'll be in two minds whether or not to develop them because you won't be sure the .uk will take off . But good luck anyway.

On a broader viewpoint:

With 2 different owners of .co.uk and .uk with undeveloped websites neither may wish to commit the monies to develop the site as the other could get the traffic in error with such similar names and neither will know which domain becomes superior, for several years and nobody wants to build a site which will become seen as inferior due to the domain name tld.

So little development will get done where the same domain for .uk and .co.uk is owned by 2 different owners and so the UK namespace will stagnate website development, not charge forward as envisaged by Nominet.

People will still acquire the .uk and .co.uk with a long term viewpoint but no real significant development of websites will take place unless both the .uk and .co.uk are owned.

(point above just made to Nominet by email as part of consultation- thanks Websaway for the thought)