<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>VRYTEK &#187; Domain News</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vrytek.com/category/domain-news/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vrytek.com</link>
	<description>Domain &#38; Hosting News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:25:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>More Global Advertisers Awake From a Deep Slumber</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/more-global-advertisers-awake-from-a-deep-slumber/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/more-global-advertisers-awake-from-a-deep-slumber/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 2011 14:40:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alain-heureux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domain-name]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marketplace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opens-the-door]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reaume]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vulnerable]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/more-global-advertisers-awake-from-a-deep-slumber/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ The World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) and the Association of Canadian Advertisers (ACA) have added their names to the growing list of advertising associations to voice disapproval at ICANN&#8217;s proposal for new generic Top Level Domains. Arising from their deep slumber, seemingly oblivious to over five years of negotiations, the WFA have written to ICANN to express &#8220;deep concerns and strong reservations held by the global marketer community&#8221; that this decision will lead to significant legal and financial risks for brands in relation to the protection of domain names and monitoring of domain name abuse. Still rubbing their bleary eyes, WFA, who has around 60 of the biggest global marketers and 60 National Advertiser Associations on five continents as members, believes that the changes are likely to introduce confusion in the marketplace, increase the likelihood of &#8220;cybersquatting&#8221; and lead to trademark disputes. Brands could be forced to engage in costly defensive registrations of domain names in order to protect their trademarks and intellectual property, requiring significant diversions of internal resources on top of the costs already associated with buying gTLDs. In its letter, likely to be soon published on the ICANN website and currently available on the WFA website , WFA calls on ICANN to abandon its plan in its current form. The sentiment was echoed by Alain Heureux, President of the Brussels-based Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB Europe): &#8220;Allowing limitless domain endings opens the door to huge registration costs and significant potential damage to both publishers and advertisers. This decision jeopardizes both our brands&#8217; integrity and the safety of consumers.&#8221; Also joining the queue in awaking from the five year deep slumber was the ACA. Not letting facts get in the way of a good story, the ACA says that a worst-case scenario would be the hijacking of a reputable brand name by a &#8220;criminal element&#8221; said Bob Reaume, the ACA&#8217;s vice-president of policy and research according to a report in Canada&#8217;s Marketing Magazine. &#8220;Virtually unlimited damage could ensue if criminals own sites with trustworthy domain names that appeal to children or the elderly or other vulnerable groups in society,&#8221; Reaume told Marketing Magazine, who obviously has not read the applicant guidebook. According to the report, Reaume considers an ideal outcome for the ACA would be for ICANN to postpone the start of the new gTLD programme. But one must ask Reaume what has ICANN been doing for the last five or more years. Reaume then suggests, in what would be comical if he was not being serious, &#8220;we&#8217;re merely asking to be consulted on this.&#8221; ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/more-global-advertisers-awake-from-a-deep-slumber/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NewTLDs.com Offers Discounted New gTLD Applications</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/newtlds-com-offers-discounted-new-gtld-applications/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/newtlds-com-offers-discounted-new-gtld-applications/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 2011 14:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[existing-domain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[instra]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[level-domains]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new gtlds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new tlds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pricing-options]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pricing-package]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-possibility]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/newtlds-com-offers-discounted-new-gtld-applications/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Applicants for new generic Top Level Domains have a new option for a significantly reduced application process, with even the possibility of brand owners having their Instra application fee waived. There are a number of pricing options, but the cheapest options depend on Instra managing the gTLD applicant&#8217;s existing domain name portfolio. Applicants for generic or geographic gTLDs will pay around a $35,000 application fee with further application and ongoing management fees detailed on the NewTLDs.com website . &#8220;Our initiative is to offer free or reduced-cost Instra application processes for those companies who wish to apply for a .Brand TLD through www.newtlds.com ,&#8221; explained Instra CEO Tony Lentino. &#8220;NewTLDs is our answer to the growing hype surrounding the new top-level domain movement. We are targeting .Brand TLDs in particular at the moment, as we strongly believe that international companies need to secure and protect their global online identities,&#8221; said Lentino. &#8220;Although current ICANN TLD application protocol indicates a significant brand protection strategy, it is still a risk that well-recognised company brands could become the target of parasitic enterprise from within the domain industry.&#8221; &#8220;The thrust of our marketing campaign for newtlds.com is simple,&#8221; says Lentino. &#8220;Our domain industry experts whilst offering an attractive application pricing package which is completely transparent will guide all applicants through the ICANN process but also to offer a unique level of corporate after-care service.&#8221; Instra plans to offer a pricing package that is extremely competitive and upfront, with their technical and industry experience is without equal. Instra through their NewTLDs.com plans to make their application process an intensely secure and actively client-focused package. ICANN commences taking applications from 12 January 2012 for new gTLDs for a three month period. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/newtlds-com-offers-discounted-new-gtld-applications/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Two $200K Sales Top Weekly Domain Sales Chart</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/two-200k-sales-top-weekly-domain-sales-chart/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/two-200k-sales-top-weekly-domain-sales-chart/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 11:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domain-sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[garden-fence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Journal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taking-out-20th]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-week]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top-reported]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top-selling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[well-as-having]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/two-200k-sales-top-weekly-domain-sales-chart/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Grid.com and downloadmusic.com topped the weekly sales chart, selling for $275,000 and $242,500 respectively in Domain Name Journal’s list of top reported sales for the week to 31 July. The two sales easily eclipsed the second-biggest sale for the week, Namibia.de, which sold for €35,000 ($49,700). Fourth biggest sale was also a .DE domain, gartenzaun.de (or “garden fence”), selling for €19,000 ($26,980). As well as having the top selling domain for the week, Sedo accounted for 11 of the top 20 sales while AfternicDLS and NoktaDomains were responsible for four and three domain sales respectively. There were 14 .COM domains in the top 20, five ccTLD sales with a .NET domain taking out 20th position. To see the Domain Name Journal list of top reported sales for the week to 31 July, check out dnjournal.com/archive/domainsales/2011/20110810.htm . ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/two-200k-sales-top-weekly-domain-sales-chart/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Europe Seeks More Influence on Governing Internet</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/europe-seeks-more-influence-on-governing-internet/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/europe-seeks-more-influence-on-governing-internet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 10:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[european]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[european-commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[european-union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kieren mccarthy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[papers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[players]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theory]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/europe-seeks-more-influence-on-governing-internet/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ A series of six papers from the European Commission &#8220;represent a wholesale effort to put governments in charge of the internet&#8221; writes Kieren McCarthy. &#8220;They would be put in a position to decide how the internet&#8217;s underlying naming structure - the domain name system - expands and evolves. &#8220;If the DNS evolves in the right way of course, governments won&#8217;t need to do anything, they will let others get on with it. But just in case people decide to do something that isn&#8217;t in the public&#8217;s interest, then governments will be there to firmly but politely inform them that they are not allowed to do that. Well, that&#8217;s the theory anyway.&#8221; To read McCarthy&#8217;s analysis of the papers and the players and what is going on, check out his posting on his Dot NXT site at news.dot-nxt.com/2011/08/31/ec-papers-analysis . ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/europe-seeks-more-influence-on-governing-internet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ICANN’s Vice President of Europe Leaves Before He Started</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/icann%e2%80%99s-vice-president-of-europe-leaves-before-he-started/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/icann%e2%80%99s-vice-president-of-europe-leaves-before-he-started/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 10:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012-departure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[announcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domain-incite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[french-prime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[from-education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[position]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recently-headed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thomas-spiller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[topics-ranging]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/icann%e2%80%99s-vice-president-of-europe-leaves-before-he-started/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Before he had even commenced, Thomas Spiller has informed ICANN that he will not be joining the organisation as its Vice President of Europe. ICANN announced Spiller&#8217;s appointment to the position on 23 June, during its 41st public meeting in Singapore. A search for an appropriate replacement has already begun. According to a Domain Incite report, Spiller decided to take a position at another company instead, and his decision not to take up position at ICANN “may have predated the announcement of CEO Rod Beckstrom’s July 2012 departure earlier this month.” Spiller is a French national who was to have been responsible for driving ICANN’s strategic objectives in Europe and manage the Brussels office. Previously Spiller has worked for the French Prime Minister’s Office and most recently headed up global policy strategy at SAS, one of the world’s largest independent software vendors. Spiller has worked on topics ranging from education, sustainability and innovation to data privacy and cloud computing. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/icann%e2%80%99s-vice-president-of-europe-leaves-before-he-started/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ICANN: Phase II of Public Comments Process Enhancements</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/icann-phase-ii-of-public-comments-process-enhancements/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/icann-phase-ii-of-public-comments-process-enhancements/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 06:29:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conclusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[focus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[focus-group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[implementation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pdf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[review-team]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solicitation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technical-forum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[topics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transparency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wiki]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/icann-phase-ii-of-public-comments-process-enhancements/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose ICANN Staff requests community feedback concerning implementation plans [PDF, 876 KB] for three specific Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT) recommendations (#15, 16, and 17) that affect the way ICANN publishes and manages Public Comments. These ATRT recommendations, which comprise Phase II of the Public Comments Improvement program, address: Stratification : Categorize topics to assist the community understand the subject matter and inform a participation decision. Prioritization : Assist community members in determining the importance or urgency of a solicitation by providing key information. Comment/Reply Cycles : Structure the community&#8217;s input process into an initial period for submitting new comments followed by a separate reply period during which community respondents would be able to address and rebut arguments raised in opposing parties&#8217; previous comments. A fourth area involving Technical Forum Improvements is also incorporated into this solicitation. A Focus Group was organized in July 2011 to provide input concerning various implementation scenarios related to the topics mentioned above. The Focus Group held its deliberations in ICANN&#8217;s Wiki environment from 20 July 2011 through 19 August 2011. A summary report [PDF, 162 KB] of the group&#8217;s activities has been prepared and the Wiki space in which the Focus Group worked is accessible for viewing at: https://community.icann.org/x/74MKAQ . The attached report [PDF, 148 KB] addresses the four enhancement areas each in a separate section that incorporates Staff implementation recommendations, Focus Group input where applicable, and additional questions to stimulate community feedback concerning these processes. Note : As an initial test of this concept, the comment forum on this paper will introduce a Reply Cycle. At the conclusion of the initial comment period (30 September) and assuming that on-topic submissions have been received, the comment period will be extended for an additional 15 days (15 October). During this extension, contributors are asked to address any additional submissions to previously posted comments. For each such reply, it will be helpful to everyone for the contributor to cite the original poster&#8217;s name, comment date, and any particular text that is pertinent. At the conclusion of the full comment period, ICANN plans to seek feedback concerning the process and what changes or enhancements might make it more useful and productive. A consolidated report of the forum submissions will incorporate both the initial comment and subsequent reply periods. Section II: Background The Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT) submitted a report to the ICANN Board on 31 December 2010 containing 27 recommendations, three of which (#15, 16, and 17) address improvements concerning how Public Comments are announced, published, and managed. At its 24 June 2011 meeting, ICANN Board accepted the implementation plans developed by ICANN Staff regarding these recommendations. These plans were organized into two major phases based upon complexity and the ability to effectuate short-term improvements. A set of Phase I activities was implemented effective 30 June 2011. In that first phase, Staff completely redesigned web pages, added new navigation menus, streamlined Announcement and Public Comment Box formats, and introduced an &#8220;Upcoming Topics&#8221; feature. Staff also created internal document templates to facilitate publication and ensure presentation consistency. We also added new standardized data fields across all solicitations (e.g., Originating Organization, Purpose, Current Status, Next Steps) and clarified opening and closing dates and times. Phase II of this initiative addresses enhancements involving: Stratification, Prioritization, Comment/Reply Cycles, and Technical Forum Improvements. Please see the attached report [PDF, 148 KB] for further information on each of these improvement areas. Section III: Document and Resource Links The following documents and reference links are provided to assist community members in contributing to this solicitation: Main Report: Public Comments Proposed Process Enhancements-Phase II [PDF, 148 KB] Board Action on, and Implementation of, the Accountability &#038; Transparency Review Team Final Report June 2011 [PDF, 876 KB] Public Comment Focus Group Report [PDF, 162 KB] Public Comment Focus Group Wiki Forum Comment Period Deadlines Open Date: 31 August 2011 Close Date: Comments : 30 Sep 2011 Replies : 15 Oct 2011 (see note in Section I) Important Information Links Public Comment Box To Submit Your Comments (Forum) View Comments Submitted This ICANN announcement was sourced from: www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-31aug11-en.htm ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/icann-phase-ii-of-public-comments-process-enhancements/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Domain Registrations Growing Over 8% Per Year As Cybersecurity Risks Grow: Verisign</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/domain-registrations-growing-over-8-per-year-as-cybersecurity-risks-grow-verisign/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/domain-registrations-growing-over-8-per-year-as-cybersecurity-risks-grow-verisign/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 03:12:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[australia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brazil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cent-increase]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[latest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verisign]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/domain-registrations-growing-over-8-per-year-as-cybersecurity-risks-grow-verisign/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Many sectors of the global economy may be struggling, but domain name registrations continue to grow strongly with registrations across all Top Level Domains (TLDs) increasing 8.6 per cent or 16.9 million in the 12 months to end of June 2011, reports Verisign in their latest Domain Name Industry Brief. In the latest quarter, growth was 2.5 per cent or 5.2 million. Country code TLDs grew to 84.6 million registrations a 3.6 per cent increase quarter over quarter, and an 8.4 per cent increase year over year in the registrations base. The .COM and .NET TLDs experienced aggregate growth, surpassing a combined total of 110 million names in the second quarter of 2011, with Verisign refusing to separate out individual registration figures. Looking out graphs provided in the report, there are around 92 million .COM registrations and around 18 million .NET registrations. This represents a 1.8 per cent increase in the base over the first quarter of 2011 and an 8.3 per cent increase over the same quarter in 2010. New .COM and .NET registrations totalled 8.1 million during the quarter. This reflects a 2.0 per cent increase year over year in new registrations, and a 2.3 per cent decrease in new registrations from the first quarter. The order of the top TLDs in terms of zone size changed slightly compared to the first quarter, as .CN (China) moved from ninth to eighth largest TLD, dropping .EU (European Union) from eighth to ninth. The largest TLDs in terms of base size were, in order, .COM, .de (Germany, currently with 14.577 million registrations), .NET, .UK (United Kingdom - 9.559m), .ORG, .INFO, .NL (Netherlands - 4.641m), .CN, .RU (Russian Federation - 3.41m) which since this report was compiled has overtaken .EU (3.389m). CcTLD statistics are from registry websites as of 31 August. Among the 20 largest ccTLDs, Brazil, Australia and Spain each exceeded four per cent quarter over quarter growth. Last quarter, seven of the top 20 exceeded the same threshold. There are more than 240 ccTLD extensions globally, with the top ten ccTLDs comprising 60 per cent of all registrations. The .COM/.NET renewal rate for the second quarter of 2011 was 73.1 per cent, down from 73.8 per cent for the first quarter. Renewal rates vary quarter over quarter based on the composition of the expiring name base and the contribution of specific registrars. This latest Domain Name Industry Brief also looks at effectively harnessing Internet opportunities, while mitigating cybersecurity risks, which can mean the difference between success and failure for small to medium businesses. The Domain Name Industry Brief notes that while the benefits of effective online marketing and branding for SMBs have been exhaustively discussed, the mounting Internet-related challenges and cyber threats often go unaddressed until it&#8217;s too late. In 2010, The Wall Street Journal reported on an international cybercrime ring that managed to steal about $70 million from small businesses, municipalities and churches before law enforcers were able to stop it. The criminals specifically targeted small businesses because their electronic defences were much weaker than larger organizations, allowing them to steal with virtual impunity. Ironically, as larger enterprises improve their defences and make cybersecurity a larger priority, SMBs become an even more attractive target to cyber-criminals looking for easy, and profitable, targets. But despite growing threats, SMBs as a group have been slow to adopt effective security technologies and protocols. In its most recent annual survey of SMB leaders, the US National Cyber Security Alliance (NCSA) (http://www.staysafeonline.org) found that less than half of SMB owners (43 per cent) were confident that their businesses were adequately protected against data thieves. Even more alarming was the fact that more than half of those polled (53 per cent) said that the cost of securing their data and networks was not justified by the threat. That&#8217;s despite the fact that more than 74 per cent of small and mid-sized businesses have been impacted by cyber attacks over the past year, according to Symantec, which pegged the per-incident cost of such attacks at more than $180,000. Effectively mitigating those threats requires a combination of common sense security procedures and smart - but not overwhelming - investments in security technology and services. In May 2011, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) hosted a Cybersecurity Roundtable focused on protecting SMBs. The FCC offered a 10-point cybersecurity checklist (http://www.fcc.gov/events/cybersecurity-roundtable-protecting-small-businesses) for companies that included simple-but-effective recommendations like installing firewalls, regularly updating software and training employees in basic information security practices. The FCC guidelines represent an excellent starting point for any SMB with an Internet connection. But for SMBs with more extensive Internet operations - including those that base significant portions of their business on email and online transactions - those steps may not be enough. As a general rule, the more an SMB relies on the Internet, the more that SMB must devote to ensuring that its infrastructure, networks and customer-facing technologies are secure and stable. The entire host of technological threats that face large companies (from email and phishing scams to hacking and DDoS attacks) can be directed equally at SMBs, where they often have a much more serious impact. The report says that DDoS attacks can be particularly damaging to online-oriented SMBs, taking them offline for hours or even days by flooding their servers with illegitimate traffic. Cyber criminals know how damaging such an attack can be to small and mid-sized businesses and will often use the threat of a DDoS campaign to extort money from owners and network operators. For SMBs with significant online investments and business offerings, it may make sense to invest in third-party DDoS mitigation services from a company that specialises in bridging the natural technology gap that occurs when smaller organizations face large-scale threats. The value of a DDoS mitigation service is that it allows even a relatively small SMB to take advantage of enormous bandwidth capacity when they come under attack. This allows networks to stay up, and businesses to continue operating, even when they are under direct attack. Whether an SMB is an all-Internet operation, or a bricks and-mortar business that uses the Internet mainly for e-mail and administrative functions, it pays to have a clear view of the cyber threats that face all SMB owners. As is always the case in cybersecurity, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. To read more of this Domain Name Industry Brief or download previous editions, go to www.verisigninc.com/en_US/why-verisign/research-trends/domain-name-industry-brief/index.xhtml ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/domain-registrations-growing-over-8-per-year-as-cybersecurity-risks-grow-verisign/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Multiyear Registrations Prove Popular For .EU</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/multiyear-registrations-prove-popular-for-eu/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/multiyear-registrations-prove-popular-for-eu/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:07:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anniversary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cyprus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domain-name]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eurid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[europe-registry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[luxembourg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Option]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quarterly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[registrant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Registrar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Registry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[some-registrars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united-kingdom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[volumes-as-some]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/multiyear-registrations-prove-popular-for-eu/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Almost one in eight (12.3%) of .EU registrations in the second quarter of 1011 were now for multiyear registrations following the registry’s implementation of this option, EURid announced in their quarterly report. On the fifth birthday for .EU in April 2011, registrants were given the option for registering domain names for up to ten years. To promote multiyear registrations, EURid introduced a promotional offer (that was valid until 31 May) where registrars received a 50 per cent discount on all new .EU registrations of two, five and ten years. “It is one of our duties as the .EU registry to continually add value to the services we offer registrars. Extending the length of time .EU domain names can be registered for is one such service and I am encouraged by how well .EU multiyear registrations were received during the second quarter,” said Marc Van Wesemael, EURid’s General Manager. During the quarter, registrations for .EU domains decreased by 1.2 per cent to 3.35 million, making .EU the fifth largest ccTLD. The number one ccTLD in terms of active registrations is .DE (Germany), currently with 14.577 million registrations followed by .UK (United Kingdom – 9.559m), .NL (Netherlands – 4.641m) and .RU (Russia – 3.410m). The decrease in registrations came about due to every April a large number of registrations are not renewed, coinciding with the anniversary of .EU’s launch. In addition, two countries, Cyprus and Luxembourg, reported reduced volumes as some registrars did not renew large sections of their .EU portfolios. However year-on-year there was a 4.2 per cent increase in registration numbers. EURid’s full report for Q2 2011 is available for download at: link.eurid.eu/reports . To register your .EU domain name, check out Europe Registry here . ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/multiyear-registrations-prove-popular-for-eu/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Safe, Stable and Secure New gTLDs: ICANN Seeks Global Background Screening Services Provider</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/safe-stable-and-secure-new-gtlds-icann-seeks-global-background-screening-services-provider/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/safe-stable-and-secure-new-gtlds-icann-seeks-global-background-screening-services-provider/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 08:02:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[all-respondents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[background]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[check-on-each]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[domains-through]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[level-domain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new tlds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[provider]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[through-the-new]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/safe-stable-and-secure-new-gtlds-icann-seeks-global-background-screening-services-provider/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ ICANN is issuing today a Request for Proposal (RFP) [PDF, 104 KB] to identify a Global Background Screening Service Provider capable of generating a thorough and timely background check for all new generic Top Level Domain Applicants. After extensive discussion, debates, and deliberations over the past several years with the business groups, trademark owners, governments, and the Internet community at-large, ICANN’s Board of Directors have approved the plan to allow entities to apply for new top-level domains through the new gTLD program.  The number of generic top-level domains, (there are 22 in existence today and include familiar names such as .com, .net, and .org), are expected to dramatically expand over the next several years. Based on extensive community feedback regarding a safe and stable new gTLD launch, ICANN has committed to conducting an extensive background screening of each applicant. The new gTLD program is designed with multiple stakeholder protection mechanisms.  Background screening, features of the gTLD Registry Agreement, easy access to zone file data, and data and financial escrow mechanisms are all intended to provide registrant and user protections.  The scope of the background screening is expected to cover, at a minimum, the entity applying, key directors, officers, partners, and major shareholders of that entity. The new gTLD program is expected start accepting applications in January 2012, and receive a diverse set of applications from all over the world.  Ensuring that applicants have the intention to operate the new gTLDs in the public interest and in compliance with the program requirements is of utmost concern.  Conducting a thorough and timely background check on each applicant is an important component of the ICANN’s application approval process. Respondents are requested to respond to this RFP by replying to: BackgroundScreeningRFP@icann.org . The period to submit questions about the RFP will close on 13 September 2011. ICANN will provide answers to all questions submitted to all respondents by 22 September 2011. The final response to the RFP is due on 4 October 2011. This ICANN announcement was sourced from: www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-30aug11-en.htm ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/safe-stable-and-secure-new-gtlds-icann-seeks-global-background-screening-services-provider/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IPv4 Trading: Arguing For And Against</title>
		<link>http://www.vrytek.com/ipv4-trading-arguing-for-and-against/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vrytek.com/ipv4-trading-arguing-for-and-against/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:49:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vrytek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Domain News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[address]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[address-blocks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[address-trading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beijnum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[egalitarian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iljitsch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPv6]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[words]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vrytek.com/ipv4-trading-arguing-for-and-against/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ As IPv4 address space dwindles, there is a debate as to whether an exchange for trading unused address blocks should be created, and ars technical has asked two of its contributors, Iljitsch van Beijnum and Timothy Lee, to argue the case for and against. Timothy Lee argues an exchange for trading IPv4 address blocks is the way to go, saying &#8220;there are still a lot of unused and underused IP addresses in the hands of various private organizations. All that is needed is an incentive for them to part with their unused addresses voluntarily. In other words, what&#8217;s needed is a market in IP addresses.&#8221; Lee says large companies with unused address blocks are unlikely to relinquish them, so an incentive needs to be created. But Lee notes, &#8220;the American Registry for Internet Numbers &#8230; has resisted the emergence of a market for IP addresses &#8212; at least one it doesn&#8217;t control. The organization insists that IP addresses are not property and that address blocks can only be transferred with its approval.&#8221; On the fairness of a market for IPv4 addresses, Lee notes &#8220;critics of selling IP addresses on the open market worry about the egalitarian implications of asking relatively poor countries like India to pay millions of dollars to rich countries like the United States for additional IP addresses. But this objection gets the issue precisely backwards.&#8221; He then says &#8220;so the alternative to Indian ISPs paying Westerners for IP addresses isn&#8217;t that they get them for free. It&#8217;s that they don&#8217;t get them at all. No one is arguing that Indian ISPs should be forced to buy IPv4 addresses. If they can go straight to IPv6, more power to them. But it would be paternalistic to try to block Indians from buying IPv4 addresses if they think that&#8217;s in their interest.&#8221; Arguing the no case, Iljitsch van Beijnum states that &#8220;US holds about four IPv4 addresses per capita, and most of Western Europe has one or two. But many other parts of the world have much less than that. China has been using up IPv4 address space like it was going out of style, going from having about 8 million addresses around the turn of the millennium to 330 million now. India, on the other hand, has almost as many people but only 35 million IPv4 addresses. Should the poorest countries in the world be forced to buy IP addresses from the West, providing a windfall to some of the richest American companies just because those participated in an e-landgrab at the right moment?&#8221; Buying up IPv4 addresses in a market will see companies like large ISPs with highly fragmented small blocks of addresses and that &#8220;just dealing with so many different contracts will be a nightmare.&#8221; So van Beijnum says his &#8220;prediction is that at the ISP level, a functioning market won&#8217;t form at all, or will break down very quickly after it forms. All the while, address trading will take away resources, monetary and otherwise, from implementing the long-term solution: IPv6. With no new supply of IPv4 addresses and an increasing number of potential address users (we&#8217;ve been using up 200 million new IPv4 addresses per year recently), an address market will be prone to bubbles. Bubbles can also easily burst as service providers move to address-conserving technologies such as NAT and IPv6. Of course the US government can always bail out service providers using the nearly 200 million legacy IPv4 addresses that it has on its books.&#8221; &#8220;If address trading happens in non-trivial volumes, the address space will also fragment as organizations sell off only part of their address space. Due to the power-of-two limitation, doing this easily adds a handful of entries to the routing tables of routers throughout the world. The IPv4 Internet will become less reliable as older routers operate at peak capacity and routing protocols are stressed. Unless the RIRs throw all their policies out the window and rubber-stamp all address transfers, it will become harder to trace back an address to its user, giving free reign to spammers and other shady outfits.&#8221; Both of these articles are available in full on the ars technica website. The article by Iljitsch van Beijnum is available at arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/08/trading-ipv4-addresses-will-end-in-tears.ars while Timothy Lee&#8217;s article is available at arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/08/the-case-for-a-free-market-in-ipv4-addresses.ars . ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vrytek.com/ipv4-trading-arguing-for-and-against/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

