Verisign Considers Restarting Sitefinder 376
Rosco P. Coltrane writes "The Washington Post reports that VeriSign is considering reviving its infamous search engine. 'Site Finder was not controversial with users' says VeriSign's Tom Galvin, and VeriSign 'assured ICANN that it would give 60 to 90 days' warning to resolve any remaining technological problems.' Such as leaving the DNS service alone for example?"
And microsoft does this anyway to all windows user (Score:5, Informative)
Mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:5, Informative)
There's a difference. Microsoft only do it at the application layer, with a particular browser that they provide. If you don't like it (and I can't see why anyone would), you can always switch to one of the many [mozilla.org] alternatives [opera.com]. Verisign's site finder operates at the DNS level. It's not as if you can choose to not use DNS, or switch to another name service.
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:2, Informative)
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:3, Informative)
Contact Verisign. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:5, Informative)
You can change the url to anything you like.
Just do a about:config and change the keyword.URL setting.
I set mine to http://www.google.com/search?btnG=Google+Search&q= which is a regular Google search.
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:5, Informative)
Are you sure?
I just tried a domain name that doesn't exist, and instead of being taken to Google or any other place, I saw a "www.randomdomainname.org not found" dialog box instead. It doesn't even give me an option to feed it to a search engine from there.
IIRC, IE will take you immediately to a search engine without displaying any error message. This is the annoying and broken behaviour that the OP was talking about.
Perhaps you've installed a plug-in or extension that is doing this?
Also, M$'s way sends you back to a Microsoft page - which is expected
No, it isn't. I expect it to say "domain name not found". End of story.
That is pure evil. (Score:4, Informative)
That would just put so much stress on BIND servers around the world. It can just very well bring down the internet for most of the world. That could easily cause a massive slow down in just looking up domain names since the caches can fill entire databases.
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:5, Informative)
Re:You would think... (Score:5, Informative)
If you just ban the SiteFinder IP, Verisign can move it..and then you're just playing whack-a-mole. If you mark
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:5, Informative)
If you can save files somewhere (most schools give you space on a central fileserver) then you can install Fire.* - download to filespace, unpack, run program. No full-blown Windows Installer access required.
And you're looking at the issue from the wrong perspective. Most admins couldn't care less what home users see when they type in the wrong URL: a search engine is a good as anything and probably the right thing to do for most people. What they do object to is the fact that wildcard DNS resolution breaks a lot of things end users never see but admins have to deal with on a daily basis - the resolution failure should be handled by the browser, not at the DNS level where there are times when you want a name that doesn't exist to not resolve.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
SiteFinder the search service is fine. The DNS wildcard to *force* you to SiteFinder is what makes people angry.
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:2, Informative)
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:1, Informative)
Outlook and Outlook Express have almost as many users as IE. And there are loads of IRC programs, and not to forget, Quake, Unreal Tournament and all the other online games.
Microsoft doing this stuff in the browser affects only people using IE, and even they can turn it off. Verisign doing this stunt with DNS affects everyone, not just web servers.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
Trivial example: spam sender checks will now resolve for all attempts, thus preventing simple blocking of spoofed senders. Want more spam?
Justin.
Re:You would think... (Score:3, Informative)
[snippet from VeriSign website]
Server Software
VeriSign runs special name server software tuned to the requirements of authoritative name servers rather than recursive name servers. With this software, the VeriSign name servers boast exceptional performance, sustaining query rates an order of magnitude greater than the performance of a standard BIND name server.
VeriSign name servers support the latest DNS protocol enhancements to insure maximum security, features, and flexibility at all times.
A redundancy... on the main article (Score:4, Informative)
ICANN should've said NO in the first place (Score:3, Informative)
They should have simply given a big fat NO to Versign's Sitefinder in the first place.
Leaving the subject open for discussion was a big mistake, IMHO.
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:5, Informative)
You recall incorrectly. If you type in a proper domain name, IE will just give you a "This page cannot be displayed - Cannot find server or DNS Error". It only tries to do a search if you type in non domain name type expressions. eg a phrase with spaces or a single word without any dots in it which doesn't match a local host.
I expect it to say "domain name not found". End of story.
That's exactly what it does say! Why do people keep confusing what happens if you type in *words*, with what happens if you type in a *domain*?
Please *try* these things before posting misleading rubbish that will only spark further trollish messages.
(I have tried all of the above in IE6)
Re:You would think... (Score:3, Informative)
It doesn't matter what Verisign uses, your ISP (or you if you're running your DNS) configures your local DNS server with the option which prohibits types other than delegation records in the .com and .net zones. Verisign could be running Microsoft's DNS server for all we care as long as it talks the standard DNS protocols.
Re:Fine, if it's within your control (Score:2, Informative)
That was the idea behind RealNames (Score:5, Informative)
There are good reasons for a hierarchy. Control is devolved, rather than concentrated in a single body. Each country has control of their own TLD, (excepting those that have sold it off) and believe it or not outside the US they *are* used, particularly for local businesses. And so on to the following levels: a domain owner has the freedom to set up as many third-level subdomains as they like (smtp.mydomain.com, pop3.mydomain.com, etc.). I don't know how this would work with a single-word system.
Anyway, many browsers *will* try .com on the end if you type in a single word, or you can just stick your favourite sites in your hosts file:
66.35.250.150 slashdot
Unbelievable (Score:1, Informative)
That's because 84% of people didn't understand how it worked or why it was bad. It like asking people if they'd like to get 80 miles to the gallon in their car, but not telling them they would have to use fuel that's $10/gallon. Of course they'll say yes when they don't know all the facts.
Re:Proof that some people never learn (Score:3, Informative)
For example, synthesising a pair of NS records for every non-existant domain rather than using wildcards. This will mean that this hack won't work, they are no longer using DNS "wildcards" per se, and all the concerns about protocol violation vanish.
Re:An extension of this idea (Score:4, Informative)
Sugarplum -- spam poison [devin.com]
sample... [devin.com]
If more people would use this, perhaps the spammers AND verisign will be discouraged. Two bastards with one stone.
Re:And microsoft does this anyway to all windows u (Score:3, Informative)
It's not returning a web page, though. Your DNS resolver asks for, and receives, the numerical address to which the domain name is bound. Now, the fact that it's your browser using the resolver means that your browser goes out and retrieves a web page under false pretenses (because Verisign lied and said the domain name you typed exists when it doesn't); it's not like DNS said "Here's a web page in response to your query".
I'm not saying I disagree with your sentiment, just that it's wrong for a whole bunch of other reasons. Imagine an "intelligent" (for want of a better word) Yellow Pages that happens to display phone numbers for phone-sex services (who are paying YP for the redirection) whenever you look up the wrong company. Or the local crank that gives people directions to the nearest crack house when they ask him how to get to the mall.
Re:That was the idea behind RealNames (Score:2, Informative)