Slashdot Mirror

It's fairly easy to see that they will run out in a few years.
This document lists the current allocations. There are not too many /8s left unallocated.
There are a few allocated to large corporations that probably don't need that many addresses though.

RIPE (Europe) were just allocated another two /8s so they must have a need.

All countries do have 2-letter TLDs; check the IANA's ccTLD page. However, some countries choose to sell their namespace for cash, and allow anybody to buy a name in their domain. .cc (Cocos (Keeling) Islands), .tv (Tuvalu) and .ws (Western Samoa) have done this, and I'm sure there'll be more to come. Just because registrars are billing these TLDs as "new" or whatever, and advertising the shit out of them, doesn't mean they're in any way special. AFAIK, ALL 2-letter TLDs are countries.

MOV for movie sites

Apple would love this.

MOV for movie sites

Apple would love this.

MOV for movie sites

Apple would love this.

There are also apparently plans to reinstate the old limits on .org domains - if you aren't a non-profit corporation, you won't be permitted to register or keep a .org domain.

There never were any such limits. Read RFC 1591

ORG - This domain is intended as the miscellaneous TLD for organizations that didn't fit anywhere else. Some non- government organizations may fit here.

In fact, although I can't find into on the IANA website anymore (it's all been "updated"), .org used to be specifically recommended as the place for individuals who wanted their own domain.

Anything more limiting than this wouldn't be old rules -- it'd be something completely new. If new TLDs are created which serve as functional replacements (something for personal and family domains, something for software projects, etc., etc.), that's all well and good for the future, but it's ridiculous and unfair to take away existing .org domains.

--

Does anyone have any idea? (and wow, an intelligent AC post!)

--

http://www.iana.org

.tm is the code for Turkmenistan.

[TMB]

They are currently http://www.who.int. I'd never heard of .int before, but the IANA say it's for "organizations established by international treaties between or among national governments", and it's in RFC 1591.
(.un seems to be free as a two-letter pseudo-country code (cf. .eu) if there is a need to distinguish UN related organizations from other international ones.)

According to IANA's database, .pl is the ccTLD for Poland.

According to IANA's database, .pl is the ccTLD for Poland.

From the writer's sig, Russian affinity, I guessed this was a CIS type nation cc. Curiously, I visited IANA's database, but, I could not find the corresponding nation this TLD belongs to. Why not? Why isn't it listed?

Doing $ dig kiae.su shows Russia is involved in the picture.

[...]
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
kiae.su. 2h59m38s IN SOA ns.kiae.ru. noc-dns.relarn.ru.

What does .su stand for?

Me pican las bolas, man!
Thanks

Secondly, how does one get a bank of IP addresses these days?

Nobody owns their IP addresses. You rent them from an internet provider. Each provider rents from a provider further up the hierarchy.

At the top of the pile is the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority who have diced and sliced the existing IP address range into pieces, and given authority over those pieces to a handful of regional authorities. This keeps the inter-regional routing simple.

See this link for a description of the process.

The ICANN exists just to make the internet a confusing place. In confusion, there is profit!

the AC

In fact, the .us domain has second level state domain names, such as dc.us, with third level cityname domain, such as washington.dc.us - the authority over these domains is delegated to whatever organization local authorities designate to exert it. It seems that almost nobody knows about the .us domain, especially not US citizens ;-)

For a exhaustive listing of ccTLDs and links to their registrars see the IANA ccTLD database

For .us domain delegations see the official United States domain registry

Note how beautifully hierarchical the .us construction is. Most ccTLDs (such as .nl) have a yucky flat namespace, just like .com

P.S.: it's spelled 'mnemonic', as in Johnny.

HTH, HAND

--

--

Domain name mil, edu and gov have always been supposedly restricted for the exclusive use of USAn organization. Cf this.

You can notice that the three counter-example you give me are canadian. An ICANN guy may have estimed that Canada was sortof part of the USA.

I dare you to find any south-american, african, european, asian, oceanian or antartican (?) counter example.

.cc denotes Cocos Islands

This http://www.iana.org/cctld/cctld-whois.htm has a list of ccTLD's

Also you can register .cc's at http://www.enic.cc/index.html

If brevity is the soul of wit this will be the wittiest speech ever. Thank-you.

Unfortunately, the domains that would make mnemonic sense are already assigned to Sweden (.se), Saudi Arabia (.sa), Sierra Leone (.sl), Senegal (.sn), and Sudan (.sd). But .sf, .sp, .sq, .ss, .su, .sw, and .sx all seem to be available.

--Fzz

Boy now weren't most of those international domains?

Interesting question. From back in the day, I thought that they were all US only. (And it's pretty believable that the US would have an ego like that, isn't it?) But RFC1591 and IANA seem to agree with you. .com, .org, and .net are all intented to be international in nature.

To save you a click, IANA says:

• GOV = US only
• EDU = US only
• MIL = US only
• COM = anybody
• NET = anybody
• ORG = anybody
• INT = organizations established by international treaties between governments

But you can find plenty of people that state or imply that .com is for US commercial interests, so I don't feel too bad for being confused.

Oh well. I'm going to try to get myself registered as a .int just for the hell of it.

Boy now weren't most of those international domains?

Interesting question. From back in the day, I thought that they were all US only. (And it's pretty believable that the US would have an ego like that, isn't it?) But RFC1591 and IANA seem to agree with you. .com, .org, and .net are all intented to be international in nature.

To save you a click, IANA says:

• GOV = US only
• EDU = US only
• MIL = US only
• COM = anybody
• NET = anybody
• ORG = anybody
• INT = organizations established by international treaties between governments

But you can find plenty of people that state or imply that .com is for US commercial interests, so I don't feel too bad for being confused.

Oh well. I'm going to try to get myself registered as a .int just for the hell of it.

To quote their about page:

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is the non-profit corporation that was formed to assume responsibility for the IP address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system management, and root server system management functions previously performed under U.S. Government contract by IANA and other entities.

I'm all for people/countries agreeing (including the EU folks) but as I understand it without ICANN or maybe IANA playing along, this doesn't mean much.

Yes, I'm aware that the article says:

The domain name itself will be protected by the ICANN rules recommended by the World Organisation for Intellectual Property.

I don't mean to piss anyone off but as I understand it, the internet is still largely American due to it's roots in ARPA and that most "authorities" on the internet are American.

Citrix

$1,000 US ICANN application fee

$5,000 US ICANN annual fee

$70,000 US in working capital

not to mention...

$10,000 US NSI registration fee

$100,000 US performance assurance bond

and even after all that trouble, NSI will take $9 US from every registration I were to put through! It's nice to have a say in who gets to go through, and to perhaps bring NSI back down to earth.

This has brought my conclusion to going through the Tucows OpenSRS system, which is a free registration and free perl based CGI's, through which I can register domains for a simple $10 US per year ($9 of which goes to NSI, $1 going to Tucows for providing us with this great service).

Some more links for those of you ready to become your own registrar:

http://www.iana.org/

http://www.icann.org/

http://www.ietf.org/

http://www.nsiregistry.com/

http://www.internic.net/

Good luck! I hope everyone helps contribute to the OpenSRS project, as it will certainly be the way of the future for small ISP's like myself who can't afford NSI's outrageous costs and bonds.

- EraseMe

" (a) Delegation of a New Top Level Domain. Delegation of a new top level domain requires the completion of a number of procedures, including the identification of a TLD manager with the requisite skills and authority to operate the TLD appropriately. The desires of the government of a country with regard to delegation of a ccTLD are taken very seriously. The IANA will make them a major consideration in any TLD delegation/transfer discussions. Significantly interested parties in the domain should agree that the proposed TLD manager is the appropriate party. The key requirement is that for each domain there be a designated manager for supervising that domain's name space. In the case of ccTLDs, this means that there is a manager that supervises the domain names and operates the domain name system in that country. There must be Internet Protocol (IP) connectivity to the nameservers and electronic mail connectivity to the entire management, staff, and contacts of the manager. There must be an administrative contact and a technical contact for each domain. The administrative contact must reside in the country involved for ccTLDs. The IANA may choose to make partial delegations of a TLD when circumstances, such as those in a developing country, so dictate. It may also authorize a "proxy" DNS service outside of a developing country as a temporary form of assistance to the creation of Internet connectivity in new areas. [N.B. The IANA continues to receive inquiries about delegation of new gTLDs. This is a significant policy issue on which ICANN will conduct a careful study and review based on the established decision making procedures. Information about this study will be disseminated on the website at icann.org.] " (bold sections added by me)

Karinna Love
Planet Three Ltd., 3A
West Point, Warple
Way, London, W3 0RG, UK

" (a) Delegation of a New Top Level Domain. Delegation of a new top level domain requires the completion of a number of procedures, including the identification of a TLD manager with the requisite skills and authority to operate the TLD appropriately. The desires of the government of a country with regard to delegation of a ccTLD are taken very seriously. The IANA will make them a major consideration in any TLD delegation/transfer discussions. Significantly interested parties in the domain should agree that the proposed TLD manager is the appropriate party. The key requirement is that for each domain there be a designated manager for supervising that domain's name space. In the case of ccTLDs, this means that there is a manager that supervises the domain names and operates the domain name system in that country. There must be Internet Protocol (IP) connectivity to the nameservers and electronic mail connectivity to the entire management, staff, and contacts of the manager. There must be an administrative contact and a technical contact for each domain. The administrative contact must reside in the country involved for ccTLDs. The IANA may choose to make partial delegations of a TLD when circumstances, such as those in a developing country, so dictate. It may also authorize a "proxy" DNS service outside of a developing country as a temporary form of assistance to the creation of Internet connectivity in new areas. [N.B. The IANA continues to receive inquiries about delegation of new gTLDs. This is a significant policy issue on which ICANN will conduct a careful study and review based on the established decision making procedures. Information about this study will be disseminated on the website at icann.org.] " (bold sections added by me)

Karinna Love
Planet Three Ltd., 3A
West Point, Warple
Way, London, W3 0RG, UK

" (a) Delegation of a New Top Level Domain. Delegation of a new top level domain requires the completion of a number of procedures, including the identification of a TLD manager with the requisite skills and authority to operate the TLD appropriately. The desires of the government of a country with regard to delegation of a ccTLD are taken very seriously. The IANA will make them a major consideration in any TLD delegation/transfer discussions. Significantly interested parties in the domain should agree that the proposed TLD manager is the appropriate party. The key requirement is that for each domain there be a designated manager for supervising that domain's name space. In the case of ccTLDs, this means that there is a manager that supervises the domain names and operates the domain name system in that country. There must be Internet Protocol (IP) connectivity to the nameservers and electronic mail connectivity to the entire management, staff, and contacts of the manager. There must be an administrative contact and a technical contact for each domain. The administrative contact must reside in the country involved for ccTLDs. The IANA may choose to make partial delegations of a TLD when circumstances, such as those in a developing country, so dictate. It may also authorize a "proxy" DNS service outside of a developing country as a temporary form of assistance to the creation of Internet connectivity in new areas. [N.B. The IANA continues to receive inquiries about delegation of new gTLDs. This is a significant policy issue on which ICANN will conduct a careful study and review based on the established decision making procedures. Information about this study will be disseminated on the website at icann.org.] " (bold sections added by me)

Karinna Love
Planet Three Ltd., 3A
West Point, Warple
Way, London, W3 0RG, UK

Just 5% ?

But I thought the world was running out of IPv4 address space really fast; and as IPv6 is still a long way from roll-out, surely this statement is either false or IANA is gonna have to get their skates on to get more sites ready for the move to IPv6!

You have competition - that's wonderful.. but without rules it's gonna get vicious in a hurry. Is there an arbitration committee with the power to enforce it's rulings? No.

Depends on how you look at it. Which two parties are you worried about here? If it's NSI and some other registry - indeed, any two registries, then the group with the power to enforce its rulings is undoubtedly the group that allocated registry status in the first place - IANA or, these days, its successor.

If NSI (or anyone else) is arguing with the very people who ostensibly hold that authority, and is thus challenging that authority, well that's ugly, and doesn't have a simple answer.

Second problem - you're maintaining multiple independent databases. Anybody who's used SQL for more than 10 minutes knows that this is a HUGE data integrity issue. Widget Enterprises decides to register widget.com, so they call up NSI and get the order put in. I can't see how the current system can support multiple root servers - they'll be constantly out of sync with the others!

Nay, nay and thrice nay. There remains one central database and, just like all the other zones in the world, one primary root server. Type dig . soa on a UNIX machine and you'll see from the SOA that the primary name server is A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET, run by - surprise - NSI.

The multiple root servers referred to in the document are, by my understanding, the ordinary secondary name servers for the root domain. DNS is neat like that, it allows you to spread the load for efficient bandwidth use, or CPU use, or reliability, or all three.

Same for the .COM, .NET and .ORG servers. Every domain registered in these TLDs must go through the operators of A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. This is what the $9 charge is for. It is rather unfortunate that the operators of the primary server are themselves registering .COM domains, but there weren't no easy way out of that one, 'cos NSI was never gonna give up all its hard work (and revenue stream) that easily.

Dave

[My opinions, not necessarily those of my employer]

--

My first though was to reply to this with an "Amen". NSI is not, has never been, and will never be the "Internet Authority" (Patent Pending [or so they think]).

Aside from the other officially sanctioned registrars, I seem to recall reading about a volunteer organization (probably on /.) offering to provide DNS services without the value-added BS of NSI. Anyway, with more registrars being accredited, I'd say its time to put NSI behind us completely.

While considering the implications of all this, I was perusing www.iana.org and was delighted at the prominent notation:

Please note that this transitional site presents both initial steps and currently accepted practices that are subject to input by the international Internet community and approval by the Board of Directors.

If you go to their site, there is a forum for public comments. /.'em with honest, frank, unflaming input on why the agreement with NSI should be terminated.

Now, if you want to be horrified, go to www.internic.net to read about the coming changes in Domain registration. First, you'll notice that you're really at networksolutions.com. But wait! If you read really, really slow (just leave the window open), you will be automatically forwarded to the NSI front door.

Going deeper into the ICANN FAQ, I found Ammendment 11 to the Dept. of Commerce/NSI contract. An excerpt regarding existing NSI customers:

• Commencing upon the Phase 1 deployment of the Shared Registration System, and for a period of 18 months thereafter, NSI shall permit any customer with whom it has a contract pursuant to which NSI provides registration services that is either facially or effectively exclusive as to registration services, to terminate the registration provisions of such contract (following payment of all amounts due up through the time of such termination) and obtain registration services from other registrars; provided, however, that NSI may enter into agreements pursuant to which NSI's counterparty agrees not to utilize proprietary intellectual property or confidential proprietary information provided by NSI to the counterparty pursuant to their agreement.

If I'm reading that right, anyone registered with NSI can switch to another registrar, with a pro-rated refund of domain fees.

Back to the original topic: Putting NSI on the RBL would be a serious wake-up call that without the participation of each and every transport provider on the 'net, they are worthless (Ok, MORE worthless).

I don't understand what people don't like about ICANN. People opposed either seem to 1) make unsubstantiated name-calling slurs, 2) have strong monetary reasons they don't like ICANN, or 3) want the United States to rule the Internet.

Several points to consider:

1. ICANN is a non-profit corporation with a strong policy against conflicts of interest. They're not in anyone's pocket.
   
2. Membership policy hasn't been finalized yet, but you will be able to participate. In fact, you're encouraged to now.
   
3. This is basically what Jon Postel proposed .
   

So what's people's problem?

--

I keep pictures of --jon. around simply because I like his beard. The IANA has quite a nice photograph collage available. I also have some pictures of Stallman, Cox, Torvalds, etc. around so I can show people what ``we'' look like. There's simply no better way to start my day than with Stallman staring down at me (I don't like to see Postel's face to often; it invokes too much grief).
Cheers,
Joshua.

I also tried recoding Bochs to execute instructions natively, but that did not work. What looks like it might be promising is hooking the memory manager so that instructions that access memory (such as MOV EDX,[EAX]) can run natively. I haven't tested this, though. Emulating I/O hardware is silly, however--just write Windows 95 device drivers that place calls to the host operating system.

Cheers,
Joshua.
You can see --jon. Postel here. Love that beard!