Slashdot Mirror
ICANN Has Approved New TLDs
dilip writes: "An Associated Press story mentions that new TLD's have been given the green light. It also mentions that there is no decision on how they will be doled out, what they will be or how trademarks will be handled.
Please note however that ICANN's own website doesn't have any mention of this yet (The story is dated the 16th, which is a Sunday, no doubt that the ICANN site will be updated on the Monday)" [timothy butts in:] John Jorsett points to this ZDNet article which says the domains include .shop, .tel and .news.
Slashdot.org
Slashdot.com
Hmmm....
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
Then you don't own the domain anymore; you're merely licensing it from the registrar, which would cause many people problems (especially those who have already perchased domains).
Did the FSF pay $50k to apply for .gnu? Or are they reacting to the work ICANN has to do to consider .gnu?
.sex?
Hmm, which porno company has enough money to apply for
Every secretary using MSWord wastes enough resources
Read up the comments a little bit. .US domains are excessively hard to obtain and excessively unrecognizable. (microsoft.com becomes microsoft.redmond.wa.us) If .com etc. moved under .US (.com.us) with the same rules regarding registration, I'm sure many more would use them.
Oh, by the way, what's up with the ticks? Some international thing? It looks f-ugly and takes more keystrokes.
a search on yahoo for "microsoft underwear" will find ya more links
-f
-f
www.blackant.net
Uhm, it'd be more than that, unless all the TLDs were one letter. And the databases wouldn't change much as long as people don't go hog wild registering domains (more than they already do).
... + 26^(n-k) when n>k
Really, all the "any TLD" movement does is remove the dot-com and change the recognizable namespace to include the TLD. Ford.cars becomes valuable, but ford.mostanythingelse is just as worthless as ford-mostanything.com.
Off-topic and I'm bored:
26^n + 26^(n-1) +
n = maximum length of the TLD
If I remembered my math I could turn that into a sum notation, but I'm not that bored.
>>1 August 2000 - ICANN to issue a formal call for proposals by those seeking to sponsor or operate one or more new TLDs,
>> accompanied by a New TLD Registry Application Form, instructions for filling out the application, and a statement of criteria
>> for the Board's eventual decision.
It looks like selecting the different TLD's will be complicated by each of the candidate registrars getting a chance to propose their own rules on how they will deal with trademarks, squatters, and the other issues that come up.
Even $50,000 may not be enough to cover the costs of analysis given the kinds of rules that have been suggested over the years.
It looks like this fall will be entertaining at least.
Bill W. --------------------------------------
Does it go on forever?
We should have done this 7, or so, years ago before the goddamn suits discovered our little paradise. Stoopid, stoopid, stoopid, stoopid.
:wq
If ICANN plan to let somecompany.com get first call on somecompany.shop, the number of new domain names will not increase significantly. The same thing will happen if they auction the site names. In fact, the only way to properly and significantly diversify the universe of top-level domains is to get rid of the .com domain, abolish it altogether and replace it with .shop, .banc, etc, instead of merely *supplementing* it with those new TLDs.
Of course, this is unlikely (because the pressure will be on to have some sort of bidding process, in the mistaken belief that this will efficiently allocate domain names). But if it doesn't happen, there'll be a much smaller increase in the number of available domains than we'd like.
Come now, we all know that slashdot will become a
;-)
Steven Rostedt
Steven Rostedt
-- Nevermind
ICANN is requiring new TLD registrars to screen and limit who can buy domains in that TLD
Seems to me they ought to start doing that with the existing TLDs before they try it on new ones.
--
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
but would it be worth the investment?
Anybody have any real idea what .tel is for? Is it for WAP accessable sites (e.g. slashdot.tel for a WAP version of /.), or for Net->Phone gateways (quick, bring up 911.tel!) or for whistle-blowers (I'm gonna .tel, I'm gonna .tel!)?
www.eFax.com are spammers
Looks like the upper(there are 2) 'reply to this' and the fake threads are part of the body of the post.
If you look at the source you can see a bunch of errors made when typing...encoded stuff in the urls etc.
Just some ideas of the top of my head...
What if the price was on a scale? That is, after the first fifteen domains registered the price goes up? It would be hard to enforce, as you could have each employee in a company register fifteen domains or something equally ridiculous. Then there's the situation of legimate use. For example, my organization has a lot of domains, but we intend to use them all (make real web sites out of them). People have offered to buy them, but we have turned them down.
Maybe the solution, therefore, would be to limit how quickly you could transfer the ownership to another entitiy? That way, the "squatters" couldn't buy a good domain one day, and then sell it at a 4000% markup the next, never having intent to use it themselves. No immediate gradification.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Perhaps the ZDNet ad sales people?
---
I am the dot in slashdot.org
Unless we wish to see the more claim jumping akin to '.com or the '49 gold rush, new procedure needs to be developed. On certain TLDs, perhaps a system of meoderation could be built. When a domain is requested, it appears on a list of domains. If I think I deserve this domain more, I can pay the license fee and halt the other person's purchase. A debate ensues, and if my argument wins, I get the domain, and he gets his money back. Otherwise, I lose my deposit, and he goes on his merry way.
.XXX domain, or anything equally hot, excuse the pun. Something else needs to be done, though. Domains are good for now, but when 6 billion people finally get computer access, we will see a lot of anger.
This would be an invasive restriction, so I don't see using it for a
Pax Digitalia
>> What we need instead is browser keyword recognition to replace the currently broken host.domain naming convention.
Opera (for windows at least, not sure about others) lets you assign "nicknames" to your bookmarks so you can type them instead of the URLs. For instance I have "slash" for my Slashdot book mark so I can simply type it and it will take me to slashdot.
This is just one of the many nifty little featuers in Opera that made me decide to buy my copy. Worth every penny.
Keywords? like.. AOL *shudder* Who decides who gets what keyword? again people squat and then you get annoying crap like _ and -'s in the name. I think the new TLD's are going to confuse people even more, most people still try .com for everything. Thankfully there is Google to help you reach your destination.
---
--
Insert Witty Sig Here
Why do we even have TLDs at all? Due to the phenomenon you mention, they don't mean anything (with the exception of .edu, .gov, and .mil anyway...)
.fogwood if I wanted to, and screw the .org after it. Domain names are primarily mnemonics anyhow- so why don't we remove the extra, meaningless designation on the end?
Amazon.com is going to have amazon.* ten seconds after these come out- so why bother?
The logical action would be to allow registration of domains without TLDs. Since domains are replicated globally all the time, why do we need TLDs? This also removes the "gotta catch 'em all" syndrome that currently exists with TLDs. I could just get
--Perianwyr Stormcrow
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
That already exists. Check out RealNames. So far it hasn't gained much popularity, but google supports it.
hlag
Actually, I can't find ANY documents showing that it is for "non-profit", I see where it is listed as a "catch-all" to catch categories "not in the above", but just because you're not .com-mercial doesn't mean you're not-for-profit. (e.g., a personal domain). D
Will we now have www.slashdot.news as our start page in Mozilla? Will we now shop at amazon.shop? Will we now do anything else different in the way we shop of surf or read news on the web? NO. The current *.com's *.net's and *.orgs will most likely just grab there namesake with a new .whatever and that will be that. I would be surprised if we use any of these on a regular basis in the near future.
Of course, that's just my opinion.
"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people in the world?"
When companies started registering every variant/misspelling/commone use of their name, the idea of using domains as an addressing scheme went straight to hell...
I say each corporage entity should get ONE entry in each TLD and then be done with it.
-- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
That is an interesting thought. How about language codes, instead of country codes? It might make more sense...
___
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
[That, of course, must be said in one's best Apu voice]
Fuck this shit! It's gonna be the fucking apocolypse man. Fucking registrations flying it from every fucking registrar. Shit. And the registrants are gonna be riding fucking net splits like on fucking IRC man with the simultaneous fucking reg attempts. There's only one fucking solution. I now repost the AC's comment:
The Solution: Allow ***ALL*** TLDs.
Seriosuly.
Allow anything to be used as a TLD.
HOWEVER, still require registrations to consist of domain name + TLD. i.e., you must still sumbit both parts to constitute a single registrationa application. The TLD itself cannot be registered to anyone. and remains open for anyone to use.
This would END squatting because it would be impossible for Microsoft, etc. to register all forms of Microsoft.* as doing so would require infinite money. This also allows same named entities to coexist. Apple Records can have apple.records. Apple computer can have apple.computers. A farmer in WA can have apple.farms. While another company can have foster.farms. Joe Apple can have joe.apple. NYC can have the-big.apple. All existing in parallel yet not conflicting with each other.
Unownable TLDs also ENDS the "domain brokering" business because specific domains cease to possess any value. If you have foo.com, foo.net, and foo.org, you can demand high $$$ from any foo entities. With infinite TLDs, there's always an alternative choice.
How to implement this from a tech POV? Use the first letter of the TLD to divide up the TLDs among the root servers to balance the load. Subdivide for common letters. Custom DNS software? Yes. But *only* for the root servers. The rest of us need not change a thing.
Will ICANN do this? Heck no. Bidding wars over limited domains generates big $$$. And trademark holders like the idea of "buying up all variations of our name so no one else can use it". So between the $$$ and politics, I suppose this sensible suggestion will never happen.
Talk about irony, why don't you? = ) The GIF is here and you may have to reload it a few times to get the version listed above, but all of them share the same concept anyway.
-- "I can't tell the future, I just work there." -- The Doctor
I have said for years that this would be the number one way to avoid having congress pass COPA. Porn site operators don't want minors on their site, they don't have credit cards. This makes it easy for parents and libraries to filter out a great majority on porn sites. This also enables adults to be able to view all the filth they want to their hearts content.
Duh!.. :) .. Now I see your pont!.. thanx..
--
"No se rinde el gallo rojo, sólo cuando ya está muerto."
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
Seriously, how do they choose who gets what first, a lottery? You know there are going to be countless squatters ready with scripts to register anything in the english language in the first three hours. What mechanisms are in place to ensure that names are not simply auctioned or held on to by the domain registrars (network solutions come to mind?) instead of the public.
However, so is s/he and all of the other constructs of the like. I hate them all, I'd tend to use "their" 'cept for when it may mess with my grade, in which case I avoid the need for a pronoun. (Which ends up being ugly...)
Insert wit here.
Sure squatting is a problem for .coms. But it's much less of a problem with the the other already-existing TLDs, .net, and .org, and plenty of non-US domains. I landed bourne.sh with no problem!
Simply put, .com is the name to have if you're a business. Reselling something else isn't nearly as marketable.
Okay.. but that's for COUNTRIES. Certainly they should adjust TLD space to reflect countries. .com, .net, and .org, and leave it to the regional entities.
They should *really* just BANISH
We are sorry. The database is currently overloaded. Please try again later.
You still can't sign up for at large membership. I've been trying all week.
--
+&x
Why not start un unofficial TLD?
All you need is a top dns that people can refer to.
The major problem is getting people to know that there is something out there, enough to be bothered with reconfiguring their DNS. This can be achieved by a few redirectors that would get pages from the new domain into the search engines.
OK, what about th IP numbers? does anyone have an idea.
-- look, cheese ahoy!
If they approve .dot TLD then Mr Malda will vey happy
Have you read the "preliminary report" from ICANN? It reads worse than 75% of the cruft that comes out of the US Congress. What in the hell are they thinking? Are they so full of themselves that they feel that all the 'whereas' and 'be it resolved' BS is obligatory? That steaming pile of over-politicized, self-important, penis-extending, CRAP pisses me off more than anything else I've read on
Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
Unless there's some legislation forthcoming, this is going to be a litigation factory. Currently, trademark law (at least in the U.S.) permits companies who are engaged in widely different lines of business to have the same or similar names. If the established companies try to corner their names in every single domain space, even unrelated ones, there are going to be some ticked off folks. Just because I have salon.com, does that mean I get to have salon.banc if I don't actually have a bank? And what if I later establish a bank, does salon.banc have to hand it over to me? Just thinking about all this makes me appreciate why they've been haggling over this change for 5 years.
It's one of those stories where you know it's coming but just not exactly when. Kind of like a birth announcement. You probably already know the sex and what the parents are naming it, but it's still news when it happens.
>So again, who is the /.er who wants to be At Large Director?
If noone else was, I was going to:}
And it will be run by the same people who run the U.S. Patent Office.
> The article mentions about .ORG as being for charities. That really pisses me off. .ORG is for non-profit organisations.
:)
Like Slashdot.
========== Section from ICANN minutes ===================
New Top-Level Domains
Whereas, the Domain Name Supporting Organization
(DNSO) has conducted a consensus-development process on the introduction
of new TLDs and the issues concerning the protection of famous trademarks
in the context of introduction of new TLDs;
Whereas, the Names Council of the DNSO made a
set of recommendations to the Board on 18/19 April 2000, including
the recommendation that the Board establish a policy for the introduction
of new gTLDs in a measured and responsible manner;
Whereas, the Names Council of the DNSO made a
second set of recommendations to the Board on 19 May 2000, which concerned
Famous Trademarks and the Operation of the DNS;
Whereas, the ICANN staff has posted a document
entitled "ICANN Yokohama Meeting Topic: Introduction of New Top-Level
Domains" on 13 June 2000 and sought public comment on the web
site concerning the Names Council recommendations and related issues;
Whereas, over 1,300 comments were received on
the ICANN web site in response to the staff posting;
Whereas, on 15 July 2000 a public forum was held
in Yokohama concerning the issues discussed in the staff paper;
Whereas, the Names Council recommendations were
transmitted to the Protocol Supporting Organization and the Address
Supporting Organization for their comment regarding the implications
on activities within their scopes of primary responsibility;
Whereas, no negative comment was received from
either Supporting Organization;
Resolved [00.46], that the Board hereby adopts
the Names Council's recommendation that a policy be established for
the introduction of new TLDs in a measured and responsible manner.
Resolved [00.47], that the President is authorized
to implement this policy according to the following schedule, which
the President may adjust if necessary to accommodate circumstances
that arise:
for proposals by those seeking to sponsor or operate one or more
new TLDs, accompanied by a New TLD Registry Application Form, instructions
for filling out the application, and a statement of criteria for
the Board's eventual decision.
of applications. Portions of these applications deemed appropriate
for publication for purposes of public comment or otherwise will
be posted on ICANN's web site.
ICANN to announce selections for negotiations toward entry of agreements
with registry sponsors and operators.
Resolved [00.48], the President is authorized
to establish a non-refundable fee of USD $50,000 for the submission
of an application to become a sponsor or operator of a registry, which
the Board finds is a reasonable estimate of ICANN's costs likely to
be associated with receipt and evaluation of such applications, and
follow-up.
Resolved [00.49], in connection with applications,
the President should seek information that he determines is appropriate.
Without limiting the information that may be sought, the Board commends
to the President's consideration the data elements described in section
IV of the staff paper, and also notes that the data elements should
include:
management, and financial capabilities of the proposed operator
of the registry;
to promote orderly registration of names in the initial phases of
introduction of the TLD;
to protect users in the event of registry failure; and
TLD to carry out infringements or other abuses of intellectual property
rights.
Resolved [00.50], that the President is authorized
to establish guidelines for assessing which proposals to select for
negotiations toward entry of agreements with registry sponsors and
operators. The Board commends the following topics to the President
for inclusion in the guidelines:
and especially the protection of domain-name holders from the effects
of registry or registration-system failure.
would lead to an effective "proof of concept" concerning
the introduction of top-level domains in the future, including the
diversity the proposal would bring to the program, such as fully
open top level domains, restricted and chartered domains with limited
scope, noncommercial domains, and personal domains; and a variety
of business models and geographic locations.
Resolved [00.51], that the President is authorized to seek technical advice from appropriate individuals or organizations to assist the evaluation of proposals.
========================================
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
This is not a good idea. This is what the <HTML LANG="xx"> tag/attribute is for.
MacSlash: News for Mac Geeks
Do the new domains also include .porn and .sex? If so I CAN'T wait!
It'll be a serious mistake (IMO) if they leave out the millions of people who make the 'Net go with their personal sites, etc. if something akin to the proposed .NOM or .PER (or whatever it was) doesn't make it to the final list.
.ORG isn't for a personal site. Nor is a .COM or a .NET.
And no,
Big mistake.
Sure, like any other "system" (taxes, marriage, etc) there are people totally willing to cheat at it. ICANN should make the penalty for cheating at this one foreiture of ALL domains. Sure, there will be sleazeballs willing to cheat, but do you really think that major corporations, who are one of the major hoarders of domains, would risk losing their legit domains just to secretly own a thousand and one variants on their product names?
The fallacy that the solution is "more TLDs" is simply foolish. If a major corporation controls 1,000 domain names just to control them, who are you kidding that adding TLDs fixes this? That's only another $35k, and these clowns spend more than that on food and booze without even the accounting department blinking an eye.
Until you start really making domain ownership a serious expense, all the new TLDs aren't worth a damn.
The people at name.space have been trying at this for a while. Same with AlterNIC, but they ruined their reputation a while back. None of it is free, but preventing domain squatters going nuts is a good thing.
The setting: inside a small appliance/tv/stereo shop. I'm killing time dinking around with their WebTV display model when a random employee walks over and takes the keyboard from me. .com or it won't take the address" .org"
"Hi. Would you like to see a demo?"
"Umm... okay." (i'm killing time, remember?)
[Now the random starts going through his spiel. i interrupt]
"could you go to slashdot.org for me?"
"slash dot dot ord?"
"no, dot o r g"
"oh. sure."
[types in (i kid you not) www./..org.com]
"no no, s l a s h d o t dot org"
"oh."
[types www.slashdot.ord.com]
"no, no dot com, just dot org"
"oh, but you have to put in the
"um. no, seriously. just
"no, it's not like internet explorer. you have to put in the _whole_ address"
"uh..."[glance at watch]"um.. i need to get going.."
there. someone posted it.
/. for spilling in their lap...
once you step back and think about it, it's really not too funny. I mean someone might sue
I digress.
"If voting could really change things, it would be illegal. " - Revolution Books, NY
It could've been .rms
If ICANN can't even figure out where it is in the geo-world, can anyone expect them to get it right in the cyber-world?
Or, as Firesign Theater said:
How can you be in two places at once when you're really nowhere at all?
ICANN or whoever has the power should increase the charges for domain name ownership such that ownership of more than 5 domains begins to cost you whatever you paid for your last domain times 2. This would make camping, hoarding, or otherwise hogging domain names very expensive. Even very rich corporations might think twice before shelling out million$ for a domain name they don't even *use*. Domain name speculators would essentially be out of business as the short-term gain from investing ~$600 million in 30 domain names. Private individuals wouldn't be too put out as there's little need that I can see for one person controlling or owning more than 5 domain names.
The "penalty" factor for these charges could go to ICANN, IETF or some other internet open standards group to use for R&D to help improve upon the internet as a whole.
Well, technically, with the ads and the whole VA/andover thing, they shouldn't be using slashdot.org anymore. We should all get used to typing slashdot.com so we know what to do when the DNS police show up at Rob's door.
---
I am the dot in slashdot.org
...and I better change my sig :)
---
I am the dot in slashdot.org
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/glossary/l ookup?term=.ORG
Actually, NSI doesn't get to set TLD policy. Can you cite an RFC to such a beast?
So I can make a rotating redirector to Nike, Kathy Lee Gifford, etc. :)
It wouldn't completely eliminate squatting, but it would eliminat the statistical value of bulk squatting (one $100K and ten $10K sales pay for 2000 unsold domains and $50K in legal fees, vs very few domains and pray that nobody sues and somebody buys).
www.* should also be banned for purchase. (i.e. www.computers should not be allowed, since it is pretty much like having .computers in the consumer space).
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Allowing all domain names will turn DNS into the Internet Keywords system, with periods instead of spaces. Not saying this is necessarily bad, but there would have to be some good rules about usage. Like reserving top-level TLDs for everyone -- they may not exist until someone registers t hem, but 'ownership' would go only to second-level domains. This way, no one owns ".store", for isntance, but "walmart.store" could be owned by walmart. Allowing direct ownership of TLDs will create a lot of market-distorting mini-monopolies and trademark lawsuits.
Just imagine. Rather than hearing, "visit kay-eye-tee-ee-dot-com" on the radio, you'll hear, "internet keyword colorful dot kites".
I'm sure people will "get a clue" about ".NET" because of "Microsoft.NET" and assume that all those ISPs using .net -- because they are network providers -- are actually trying to copy Microsoft's "innovation" and get in on the game.
How much do you think I could auction the domain Castlemain.xxxx for?
The simplest one is just to use a Dutch auction: Bids are sealed, secret, and published after the end of the auction. You know how much those domains are worth to you, the pirates don't. They'll either bid low (you win) or bid higher than you would pay (they lose, since they'll have a domain that's worth less than they paid). This eliminates the spread, making cyber-squatting and -pirating uneconomical.
There may be other situations to work around, but I think auctioning domain names is the only way to deal with the current problems. (And I'm not even the original poster...)
TSG
That, of course, must be said in one's best Apu voice
More wisdom from the Church of Apu.
"Silly Customer! You cannot hurt a Twinkie!"
"Please do not offer my God a peanut."
And of course, the all-time classic:
"Thank you for coming! I'll see you in hell!"
>Actually, NSI doesn't get to set TLD policy. Can >you cite an RFC to such a beast?
.com? why not get .org and .net to go with it!"
I don't think such a RFC exists, though Network Solutions set the policy theirselves for a long while before they threw it out the door and said "own
//m
Looks like Andover bought it from the squatter that previously held it, unless he was a kind soul that handed it over for free. I seem to remember the previous owner had a simple page with a link to Slashdot.org and some other misc stuff, and it definitely wasn't registered to either Andover, Malda, or any of his crew until recently.
Registrant:
Andover.net (SLASHDOT6-DOM)
50 Nagog Park
Aston, MA 01720
US
Domain Name: SLASHDOT.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
DNS Technical Support (DT1415-ORG) dns_tech@ANDOVER.NET
Andover.Net
50 Nagog Park
Acton, MA 01720
US
(978) 635-5300
Fax- (978) 635-5326
Billing Contact:
DNS Billing (DB2055-ORG) dns_billing@ANDOVER.NET
Andover.Net
50 Nagog Park
Acton, MA 01720
US
(978) 635-5300
Fax- (978) 635-5326
Record last updated on 11-Apr-2000.
Record expires on 11-Apr-2001.
Record created on 11-Apr-2000.
Database last updated on 16-Jul-2000 11:02:23 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.ANDOVER.NET 209.207.224.196
NS2.ANDOVER.NET 209.207.224.197
I have no problem with any commercial XXX site being forced to a .xxx tld. Of course, there is the sticky issue of defining what exactly is commercial, and what to do about sites that let ppl look at pr0n for free, and make their money with banner ads...
.xxx tld"?
.xxx tld attached to their name, so no problem with going to a .xxx address and _not_ finding your goat pr0n or whatever...
.xxx tld. Of course, they'd probably just move the corporation out of the US, but it would be a start, I guess. Next would be getting the UN or somesuch to get this policy to spread to all the other nations.
I also don't see lobbying as a major issue: what will they tell the congressmen: "uh, we believe that the American public has a God-given right to see 'butt naked slut go fucking nuts' whenever they like? and uhhh, we don't want to be forced into a
As for the URLs not wanting to tell you where you are going: maybe the pr0n dealers won't want you to know, but make the feds force them. And trust me, noone else will _want_ an
In the end, it may be just prudent to force all pr0n operators (at least in the US) who make more than oh, say, $10k in profits a year to move to a
IMO, cries of censorship are invalid, since the pr0n is not only still all there, but more clearly labeled than ever. What can they bitch about?
Good idea, but what is to stop me from buying "apple.computers" or "America.online" or "General.motors" etc, and squatting them? I realize that the potential names would be almost limitless, however, many of the bigger names (and there are a lot) that would be the most logical, and thus most desireable to these companies, could still be squatted. Also, the fact that trademarked companies couldn't buy up all TLD variations of their names, could create potential for unscrupulous people to create "imitation" sites that could fool people into thinking that they are dealing with the real company. Imagine the personal information that could be gathered from people thinking that they are really on Microsoft's website, or any online business that would, for legitimate purposes, collect information like address, phone numbers, or credit card information. On my final rant, even though most major (mainstream) sites are .com, could you imagine the confusion if they go to a standardized system, ie: .sex, .tv, .geek, etc? Who would be responsable for catagorizing the content of the site? For example, is /. a .Linux site? Or a .news site? A .forum site? What really needs to happen is to find a way to end the practice of squatting domains. A domain police? Perhaps there could be a way to do this economicly. To sell a domain for a high price, it would most likely be sold in a popular place. (ebay, yahoo auctions, etc.) Time limits could be set on the time from a registration to actual publication of the site. Or perhaps an application that would describe the content of the site and require a contract to be signed stating that you will use the name for your personal and intended content and not resell the domain until or unless you sell it as part of an internet business, etc, otherwise it would be reclaimed by the registrars for further use. This is a very simplified idea, but it could be written to exclude loopholes that would prevent would be squatters from buying "freecomputer.com" (just a random example, I don't even know if its a valid domain) and selling it for $5000 by putting a picture of their pet cat on the site and calling it "published".
--I assume full responsibility for my actions, except the ones that are someone else's fault.
Private individuals wouldn't be too put out as there's little need that I can see for one person controlling or owning more than 5 domain names
Yes, and because not many people own domains, there might be many business propositions to be made, large company to private individual:
Ominous voice: Hello, Mr. X, how'd you like to buy a domain name for me. I'll provide the redirection page and everything, and I'll give you some free hosted space for your own site. I would give you...
Even more ominous voice: Five *thousand* dollars.
Mr. X Sure, thanks!
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
My question, I guess, comes down to whether or not .xxx will represent all the legitimite pornography on the internet by providing a classification based on domain name. :) What I mean is, will the ICANN domain names have any real merit in classification, whereas the .coms, .nets, and .orgs for gumbi are all owned by the same copyright holder.
from the ICANN website:
.booyeah or a .wazzup, but do 'free' orginazations have this kind of money to just throw away? this does not include fees that might come later for running a TLD and connecting to the rest of the network...
Resolved [00.48], the President is authorized to establish a non-refundable fee of USD
$50,000 for the submission of an application to become a sponsor or operator of a registry,
which the Board finds is a reasonable estimate of ICANN's costs likely to be associated with
receipt and evaluation of such applications, and follow-up.
does anyone not think this is a large fee for applying, enough to prevent a
Well, it's to be expected... ICANN has a situation where the division of sites by their tld uses two criteria. Geographic location and content-type. Obviously, location is going to lose because:
a) the net is supposed to be "without borders" (at least in public perception)
b) in the venture-capita-fueld ubercapitalist internet of today, web sites that don't appear to be us-based are regarded as either substandard or downright untrustworthy.
Gross generalizations? You bet. But like all gross generalizations, there's a damn big wad o' truth in there.
Lastly, this two-criteria division is just plain dumb. It's like shopping for a used car in the classifieds, only the classified people have said you can only describe your car by either colour or year. 1995 Ford or Blue Ford.
2 1337 4 u!
the AP story mentions allowing the election of 5 members by 'registered internet users'. what's a registered internet user ? if it's only corporations, not only do i not see how it will change anything, except open them up to more corporate rule, as if they're not already, but what about people? the internet is 'suppossed' to be a last resort for freedom of speech.
To eliminate cyber-squatting, they could auction off the names to the highest bidder. Copyright over names would still take precidence.
Set up a time period, say thirty days, where anyone could bid on the name from a domain. Start out at a flat rate, and let people bid higher if they wish. If in that time, a person or entity could make a valid claim to owning the name, the auction would be voided and arbitration would take place to determine who had the most right to the name. Otherwise, highest bidder rules. Things like "toys.shop" would be under a huge bidding war. I don't think any one company could validly lay claim to the name...
I know this unfairly biases towards those with money, but how else are you going to prevent someone registering every word in the english alphabet?
Maybe we could bid with something other than money, but I don't think ICANN will accept slashdot karma points...
You didn't seem to look very hard...
y /lookup?term=.ORG
.org, a worldwide top-level domain.
.com.
.US top-level country code domain. Prior to October 1, 1997, registration in .GOV was handled by Network Solutions; the General Services Administration (GSA) began handling registration in this top level domain starting October 1, 1997.
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/glossar
.ORG: The top-level domain originally designated for miscellaneous entities such as non-profit organizations that do not fit under any of the other top-level domains. Any person or organization may now register a domain name in
And others...
.COM: The top-level domain originally intended for "commercial" entities. This is the most recognized top-level domain worldwide. Any person or organization may register a domain name in
.EDU: The top-level domain designated for four-year, degree-granting colleges and universities.
.GOV: The top-level domain designated for agencies and branches of the United States Federal Government. State and local governments in the United States should use the
.MIL: The top-level domain designated for United States military entities.
//m
I thought the at-larges were supposed to be the counterbalance, the last bastions of hope for the average user to offset the awesome and frightening clout of the corporate droids. At the time people complained that at-large representation seemed to be merely a bone thrown by the powers-that-be, to defuse charges of corporate dominance.
Sadly, it seems such accusations were correct.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
I've been seing all kinds of errors lately. Particulary one story was all messed up. Check #1, #6 and #9.
See the funny:
j' Z^;`a6%<`&f>_^4da\?>\_`"$c40u4a]83 9cg:kf&7f\m_sp[ai3?"
Just look at the bottom of this page (#1) Click on parent and it takes you to a totally different story!?.. wtf?
I mailed pater@/..org ... Maybe some .dll file has been infected?!... ;P
Thank you.
//Frisco
--
"No se rinde el gallo rojo, sólo cuando ya está muerto."
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
Are you an AOL user? "keywords"... geez... puh-leeeez.
Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
These, every tinplate legislator is trying to apply regulations or taxes to "their" slice of the Internet. We see systems like Carnivore and the firewall in China trying to re-partition the Internet. We see juries and judges trying to apply local standards to a global medium. Anything that calls attention to the geographic location of a server works against the global nature of the system.
It's time for people to understand: cyberspace != real space! There is no good reason -- and about a zillion bad ones -- to replicate the geographical structure of the planet in the Net. Let it go, already.
For from establishing a US dominance, forcing everyone into .com, etc., would lower barriers. Of course, the whole system is mucked up anyway...
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
You're darn right I'm no charity, and neither is this person. Just so happens we have .org addresses since none of the names we wanted were in .com or .net. Matter of fact, I tend to register .org addys when I'm doing a project or something, since they're almost always available.
--------------------
I live in a town with a population of 4000, and I'm one of 2 people here that knows how to run a nameserver. So when I wanted a me.city.state.us, I had to set up the server, find a government representative willing to listen to a nerdie teenager, fill out a (paper) registration form, sign it in upteen places, and fax it. And this was after filling out the online form 5 times before they were satisfied with the information I'd provided. I actually went a little far in my description of the process. I had to stop at the 'find a government representative', because I had no idea who to talk to, and those I asked could have cared less. So I stuck to my .net domain, thank you very much.
Maybe its different in other counties, but its pretty worthless in the US.
--
In Canada, until just recently (its undergoing a change in management), .ca domains (and their provincial counterparts such as .on.ca) were given out for free to corporations, registered charities, et. al. who requested them and gave proof of existence basically.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to ICANN's proposed TLD expansion for the following reasons:
TLD expansion is a shitty solution chasing after a near-nonexistent problem.
Steve Magruder, Technopolist
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
My favorite from the takes-Gonads++to-file-this trademark file is this one (now, alas, abandoned):
= demsi8.2.14
http://tess.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state
which attempts to register the "microsoft" mark for, among other things, adult diapers.
There should be a short time period where only the owner of yahoo.com can get yahoo.shop, but after that short period everything should be up for grabs.
Trying to enforce all pr0n to a .xxx tld might be a good idea, but who gets to say what is worthy of a .xxx?
Would playboy be considered xxx? Penthouse or hustler?
There are a few ways this could be set up, The root servers could be set up so that all TLDs that start with A point to a certain one, B to another one, and so forth.
just an idea.
Josh Hinman
If you've ever tried to register a .us you know how shitty it is. they say NO corperations allowed. There isnt 1 central registrar to get it either. .us assigns the 50 states a .state.us type thing and thats it. Then the state assigns it to the cities and its the cities job deligate.. however with a small city i doubt that they have the know how to do that. Also inside of the .state there are .k12 for schools and other such domains. If i would like to get a .us domain to save .com space i would end up with something like: mbrez.brookfield.wi.us not as easy to remember than mbrez.com. If they opened up the .us space more for .com.us, .org.us, .net.us, .edu.us you would find a LOT more companies registrating in the .us space and you could almost give them away to companies to encourage them to use .us. I know i see a LOT of .co.uk and such but the only reason i ever use .us is for my school (www.elmbrook.k12.wi.us [not allowed to register elmbrook.edu either..and we wonder why NO ONE knows the web addy]).
nuff ranting
Has anyone looked at the use of non-latin alphabets for domain names and TLDs? There are countries, such as China and Russia, that might prefer to use other alphabets in their domain names. How would you like it if all Internet domain names were written in Hindi?
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Once the new TLDs are available for registration, I want to register www.in.tel, www.nerd.news and www.i-hate-to.shop
...and your name is overloaded
nal 11
Allright, I will have in.tel, nor.tel, sex.shop, book.shop and today.news. That have to be enough to retire.
I know it's a sore subject, but if they did .shop, why didn't they also do .xxx? Considering the publicity that the move to have .xxx created has been largely christian conservatives bent on eradicating porn from the internet, i don't see why just creating a .xxx tld and giving porn kings free reign over that tld is such a bad idea. atleast when you get spam that leads to a porn site, you'll know it's going to a porn site. and it will get rid of the misspelling problem and the whitehouse.com problem. Okay, maybe calling them a problem is a bad idea, but just as porn has its place in both movie rental stores and in book stores, can't we put porn on the internet in its own little nitch without pissing off too many people?
This isn't necessarily so. The problem with some of the existing TLD's is that they don't have any clear criteria for who will and won't be allowed to register a domain. Essentially anyone is allowed to register a .com address, so it's essential to preempt anyone else from getting desired domain names.
But if the FSF gets their wish to have a .gnu TLD, they can (and probably will be required to by ICANN) have a strict policy about what one has to do to qualify for a .gnu address. You might, for instance, be required to have a software project with the name you intend to register that meets FSF guidelines as free software. Thus there couldn't be an etoys.gnu unless someone had a free software program called etoys, and the fact that it was a software program rather than an online toy merchant would be adequate defense against trademark infringement. Similarly, the registrar for .sux might very well require that the owner of a copyright is forbidden from owning the corresponding .sux domain. It's perfectly reasonable in serving the purpose of the TLD.
The point is that the whole problem with the existing system is that there's a real shortage of top level domains. This wasn't a problem when the current system was established, because people weren't setting up personal internet addresses or a zillion different addresses for the same company with different names for each product. Now, though, there's serious collision between any person named Barbie who wants to set up a personal web site and Mattel Corporation, and you know who's going to win in that kind of a showdown.
If, though, there were a .mine or .per domain for personal web sites, and a .prod domain for product names, it would be obvious to anyone that barbie.mine was the personal web site of someone named barbie and barbie.prod was the site for Barbie dolls. Then all you'd need is a little bit of case law (or legislation) to show that these sites are sufficiently distinctive that a trademark holder doesn't have to sue to take down personal web sites and a lot of problems go away.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
So does anyone actually believe that the Indianapolis Bull Manure company is going to be able to register ibm.shop? Gimme a break. So long as the existing IP laws remain in effect, this is just another way for moneyed interests to muscle their way in to the endless profit of Network Solutions.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
If the post is marked OT (OffTopic) you don't need to mark it offtopic, moron... Everyone can see it's offtopic and you can use your point son moding UP to mark interesting ontopic posts... On the other hand maybe it's ok that you waste your mod points so you don't make more lame ass-brain moderations...
Does this mean slashdot.org will become slashdot.news?
ibm.shit
Billy will probably register it for the marketing and sale of Sexy Undies. Either that or a support group for men with tiny dicks. The possibilities are endless.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Because I hoped to make a humorous point about for-profit businesses and .org, I went to mafia.org. Just a little place-keeper page there. Then I went to mafia.com and got taken to idrive.com. Now I'm wondering if iDrive is a wholely-owned subsidiary of the Legitimate Businessman's Club. :-)
It also looks as though they're not completely brain-dead on the topic of trademark infringement and/or cybersquatting. One of their criteria for evaluating the proposals of new domain registrars is their treament of the following:
IOW, if you want to register new TLDs, you'd better have a plan for how you're going to prevent trademark infringement and cybersquatting. It's too bad that they can't go back and apply those criteria retroactively to their existing registrars for .com, .net, and .org.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
--
Seriously, what's the f***ing point? Of course all the major companies will squat on all the new domains as well (think etoys.gnu, etoys.rob, etoys.sux and so on) because they don't have a choice if they want to preserve brand recognition. What we need instead is browser keyword recognition to replace the currently broken host.domain naming convention.
"I will take the Ring," he said, "though I do not know the way."
It's like a train wreck. Despite the fact that it's disturbing beyond belief, you just can't help but look.
Hi, munificent Slashdot moderator. .sex TLD. :-( ). .sex TLD and only this one then this could made most people searches even easier. .edu and .sex than between .com and .shop.
Thou might have made a wrong choice by classifying this message's parent as a troll/flamebait,etc (hence giving i the 0 it IMHO didn't desserves).
If there no actual TLDs have now been defined then Anonymous Cowards didn't have a bad idea by suggesting the
I have been surfing the web since 1990 an I saw more and more sex domains appearing amongst my Altavista search results.
Imagine yourself finding some bizarre porno-nazi area while looking for some specs concerning SMP Alpha systems (this happens more than one'd expect
If one could convince the pornographs to use the
For lotta people, the Internet is still a library, not a shopping-mall nor a sexodrome.
TLD were originately aimed at allowing a basic web sites classification that would have overidden acronyms (caca.edu would be a education-related site, not a scat one ), we should look deeper into it and IMHO this is far more important to distinguish between
Bye.
--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Oh no! What a sad loss for us all. Truely, this is the wake-up call we all need. Feral Wylde I is turning his/her/its back on the shambles /. has become. Now, surely, everyone will see the light and beg him/her/it to return to us, forgive us, and share more of his vague, badly-spelt, I'm-so-wise-I-seem-dumb pearls of wisdom. For he/she/it is The Only One With A Clue. He/she/it is never trivial nor ignorant and will not tell us wtf he/she/it is talking about only because our poor brains would not cope. That's the kind of guy/girl/artificial life form he/she/it is.
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Ever heard of SSL? Besides encryption, it solves the problem you mention about identity. Ever try to get a secure certificate? They want to know everything about you except maybe your medical history...
could you imagine the confusion if they go to a standardized system, ie:How long will it take before people realize you can't categorize everything... Sure, it's nice to try, but there's no right way.
What really needs to happen is to find a way to end the practice of squatting domainsShort of a huge bureaucracy, this sounds like the best solution yet. Sure, there'd be some squatting, but it'd be a hell of a lot more difficult to squat everything. If someone sqats on bobs.cars, Bob could then just register bobs.chevys or bobs.autos.
Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
A zombie eating of the stomach of a dead woman.
<O
( \
Will I retire or break 10K?
sort of like the deal where people say its ok to use "their" with singular pronouns.
So, if you don't know whether you're refering to a male or a female, what term would you use?
end user: I'm trying to get to the address 'books.shop', but it won't come up, are you down?
me: Not the last time I checked. What exact address are you putting in?
end user: www.books.shop.com
me: sound of head banging against well worn forehead dimple in desk.
Instead of a domain system, I think that there should be a regulated search engine, with categories, etc, much like yahoo, that people would register their sites in. The domain system has just failed. To get a domain these days, you have to come up with something pretty damn wacky and easily forgettable, so you might as well just give people the IP. Maybe with IPv6 we could just have permanent IPs in much the same way we have permanent domains. Then if we ever move then just have the IP routed differently. This might cause a major headache for routing tables, but maybe something could be worked out. Who knows... I really have no idea =)
I think we can see an example of this same system with phone numbers. Imagine everyone trying to have a unique name instead of a phone number. Sounds ridiculous, right? Everyone has a phone. Well, pretty soon everyone will have a website. But I guess wheels are very hard to stop or even turn once they get rolling. Nic
What I honestly don't understand is why they even bother to continue to expand the TLD space.
Think about it. Every dot.com that's any dot com is going to snatch up its corresponding dot.shop or dot.tel or dot.whatever and redirect it to the original site. Any dot.com that doesn't do this will be playing catchup for a seriously long time. Sure, domain squatters may make this difficult, but in the long run, the dot.coms and the dot.whatevers will all be the same anyway.
If someone snatches up something.shop and something.com wants to get the address from them, they'll pay to get it.
So what's the point? Business for domain name registrars, I guess.
I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.
... and ".rocks".
I no have an image of a woman in seductive lingerie with the slogan 'microsoft, where do you want to go today?'
dave "I wanna go *there*, baby!"
And we thought the rush for the dotcoms was bad... Now that everyone is more aware of the potential worth of domain names the mad rush to grab up names is going to be overwhelming. I'm interested to see exactly how the fair/legal way to allow registration of then new TLDs is going to proceed.
.com, .net and .org allow a free for all.
We already have a bunch of big brokers calling every week asking when they can start to "pre-register" names from the new TLDs. This is absolutely insane if you ask me. I sure hope ICANN and the accredited registrars can work out a good plan otherwise all heck is going to break loose.
One way to possibly handle this is only allow registrants of a particular name the ability to register the same name in the new TLDs and then for unregistered names in the
That way we would stop, Joe Blow from registering yahoo.shop but if he comes up with a new domain like joeblowiscool.com he can register whatever he likes.
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
www.npsis.com
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
www.haidacarver.com
It's bloody annoying, though. In my neck of the woods (Nova Scotia), I think there's maybe one ISP that does not have a .com addy (ie .ca like stuff is supposed to).
What is the point of the country codes if nobody bothers to use them? The domain system should be utterly demolished, or actually enforced. No spanish fishing trawlers nabbing .ca addies for their personal pages, and sticking .com/.net/.org/etc in the US where they were originally intended. Or even better, yoink them altogether.
Is domainname.type.country really that difficult?
I suppose so. It'd make sense.
*grumble*
-Patrick Stewart
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
well, only one. add to the thread.
ho.tel
business plan: urban prostitutes cater to online clients in virtual hotel.
This won't work well unless there are some restrictions on who can use the new TLD's.Right now if you do a search for a domain name from Network Solutions home page even if the domain name is taken they will give you "suggestions" as to whats available..If you search for anything.com you will get a list saying eanything.com,aboutanything.com,anythingonline.com ,anythingcentral.com are available..mo' money.Also is it just me or did it used to when you ran a whois you got a little dislclaimer saying that you couldn't use the information in a nasty manner(I forget how they worded it) but that seems to be gone now.And within the last coupla months I've gotten one snail mail from e-nic and another email from someone registering .tt domains trying to solicit my business.I thought it was illegal to mine the Netsol whois database for information but I guess that's changed.
notimeforsigs
If similar things are in place for the other TLDs, then it'll be a load of fun to see who gets microsoft.sex, and what they'll put up on it.
What I mean is, you can consider tld's to be a simple "cookie" that partitions the group of sites to your locale. Why would I have to choose between Western & Kanji if the choice is obvious with a .uk appended ? Why ask a country code to avoid showing the list of all sony dealers worldwide on sony.com, when you might as well have typed sony.fr ? Besides, a country tld is still a valid method to avoid name collisions between unrelated, but similarly named companies in distinct countries (not all companies are ThereCanBeOnlyOne multinationals, you know).
Well, that's all I can think of, so it's probably not enough to outweigh your zillion counterpoints, but at least "no good reason" has been rejected ;) So although the metaphorical net transcends location, it's actual content often does not.
Seriusly, I have thoght of creting a company that compeats with Victoria Secrets and naming it Microsoft. I.e. Micro sized undies made from soft material.
Specialising in stuff to make petite women seam larger than they are wold help too. Lots of horizontal stripes on panies for women with small rears.
Hmm... I'll go looking for venture capital now.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Isn't this the opposite of what we had just heard from Esther Dyson, who basically had said the ICANN was in the process of determining the process of applying for a new TLD? I forget where the article was published; can anybody help out with a link?
Free music from Jack Merlot.
This is real. There is a French lingere company that made some underwear called "microsoft" (small m). Microsoft (big M) was unhappy, but allowed them to use the name with a small m. I don't have a reference off hand, though..
cpeterso
The two word criteria has been adressed in several countries by using names in the form of COMPANY.com.Country_Code. Take for example: http://www.sepultura.com.br/.
I seen sites using these "name conventions" in .uk and .au so there are probably even more... The cuestion is who registered com.Country_Code?.. :) .. In some countries it's squatters in others it's probably state regulated.
<RANT> .se domain. You had to register into subdomains of what in an American perspective could have been subdomains based on the county!.. Something like mycomany.d.se. The really bad part was that there's no logic in the nameing of the "county (län)". Hardly anyone knows the letters of more than their own "län". So hardly anyone used this. And since many couldn't register .se domains they went for the .nu and .com somains. At a time (probably still) there were more swedish companies using .nu than .se domains... What's the lesson we've learned - stupidity has no boundaries... :)
One stupid rule that has been withdrawn just last year here in Sweden was that unless your company was registered as a joint-stock company, (corporation US) you weren't allowed to register a
</RANT>
Thank you.
//Frisco
--
"No se rinde el gallo rojo, sólo cuando ya está muerto."
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
You could always try Google. Feeling lucky?
<O
( \
Will I retire or break 10K?
Really? There have to have been new countries since then... not that I can think of any offhand, but aren't names and borders changing annually?
2 1337 4 u!
ICANN says: "Uhhm, we don't know how many or what TLD's we are going to approve, or how to protect them, but this is obviously a story of great importance to humanity.
I'm not angry at slashdot for posting this story, I'm just wondering why it's important.
What percentage of site owners will get the new TLD to match their current one? 50%
"The first new Web addresses should start to appear by this year's end or the beginning of next, but no one will know what the new top-level domains will be until November."
Everything in this post is false.
The ICANN site has now been updated. You can get the preliminary report of their little chat-party in Yokohama here.
I strongly believe that trying to be clever is detrimental to your health. -- Linus Torvalds
New TLD's will be useless, until, and unless, ICANN enforce some restirctions on who gets what domain names.
.net and .org too!", anyone?) will contiue.
It started with how the domain names are adiminsted, (ie, for profit), which ment thaqt it was advantageous for the administrater (NSI) to sell as many as possable. This _must_ change, else the whole squatting, and registering of multiple domains ("Click here to register
ICANN, get some real rules on who gets what in there, else all you've done is up the registrars profits.
Unless, of course, that _was_ the whole idea?
10% was undoubtedly too much to ask, so this means it will be easier to enter. So again, who is the /.er who wants to be At Large Director?
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
That these will include .shop, .tel and .news are only examples that ZDNet takes out of thin air. Now, you should be able to guess that from ZDNet's own words:
So, it is not clear that .shop, .tel and .news will be on the list. And, the At Large Directors who are going to be elected will probably be involved.
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
Small idiocy found in Ziff D. article.
No-one killed, no-one injured.
Move along now, there's nothing to see here.
Just when the Tuvalunese start getting an income stream that doesn't involve having their islands, or their neighbours', trashed by phosphate mining, ICANN wipe them out with the .tel TLD !
Actually, this is much, much better than if they had decided to announce a bunch of new TLD's. The big problem with the current system is that it's essentially ad hoc, and just coming up with some new TLDs wouldn't have helped that. Instead, they appear to have decided that there needs to be a formal process for generating new TLDs.
This has two big advantages for the system. For one thing, it means that the registrars for the new TLDs will actually have to have a plan and a reason for being. Rather than just coming up with some new TLDs, they'll have to justify why their new TLD is worth adding. For another thing, it means that the process will now be regularized and not necessarily require high level action to approve new TLDs. That means that as a new need arises it will be much, much faster to fill it with a new TLD.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
I posted on this exact issue once before but
i may as well repeat it - although nobody of
consequence will listen.
Domain system is bogus, the whole idea of
single english word "dot" a finite number of
half-legible suffixes to mark a diverse body
of companies, organizations, entities, ideas,
events, people etc. is utterly inadequate.
It is sort of like trying to describe everything
in the world using 5 verbs and a small number
of nouns.
This system had one purpose - to map IP addresses
to human readable words that are easier to
understand. The Internet outgrew the stage
when it was just a collection of ip addresses
and servers. There is a whole new social dynamic
involved, it is a world upon itself and in that
world one way of finding things isnt good
enough. Just like the Yellow pages may be
a decent guide but it is not all the world and
there are great many other ways to look for things.
But - neither big corporations nor software
manufacturers neither frankly a consumer are
ready or willing to make a serious change.
So we are stuck in a 21st century using naming
conventions worthy of Indian tribes (no
offence) about 2000 years ago.
Well, good luck to all of you, "4 eyes":)
(Oh, btw - yes i know what can we do, now i
am sure some of you do to - there are much
better solutions - extending tld's and
prolonging an agony isnt one of them)
--
Irina Romanov
Irina Romanov
It's really just a matter of practicality - if they don't add .porn they're stupid.
Wow, after a couple years of waiting, we finally get an announcement that there will be new TLD's sometime soon. Furthermore, they will separately convene to decide which ones they will add, then hopefully get it done by the end of the year sometime. Gee, I can hardly contain my excitement.
I registered my hate for Jon Katz
The article mentions about .ORG as being for charities. .ORG is for non-profit organisations. I am part of a community which uses .org address, and we are definately NOT a charity. .net and .org sites than .com's , but its not our oh-so-great-superiority complex that i am talkign about.)
.org, they barely register what it means, heck it wouldnt suprise me if people started wondering ".net? what the hell is that?! arent all internet addresses ending with .com?". SO i wonder, what will the effect be of those TLD's? Will people recognise them? Or will big companies say "the average Jon Doh only knows dotcom, we dont want to confuse his little brain with .shop or .tel".
.org is ONLY for charities.
That really pisses me off.
What worries me is that more and more people are becomming clueless as to even the existance of non-dotcom addresses. Think about it, all the adds you see, all the advertising you are being pounded with, all the hype in the media, its all about the dotcom. How many dotnets or dotorgs are famous? (yes, yes, i know, people in the know-how visit more
So the thing is, when people see
Oh damn, i was only supposed to rant about how the writer of the zdnet article is a clueless dork for thinking that
Thank you for skipping through my post,
;)
The silly thing is that every major corporation will find out who has the new TLDs and then go out and register under each of them ASAP. ibm.sex and microsoft.shop will then be owned by guess who.
.com domains registered and about 20% of those will register with any new TLD that becomes available.
.com and .net domains you ain't seen nothing yet. Expect people to register huge piles of .sex domains to keap them from being "abused". I.e. whithouse.sex probably won't go the way of whithouse.sex even though it should :)
.sex do you have to include *only* nude pictures, interviews etc... of people you actually had sex with or can you be more general in your approach ?
The people biding for the rights to administer these new TLDs knew this from the beginning and it's why they push so hard for it. a cope Million
If you thought you saw cibersqauting and abuse with
So OSM are you gona register natalee.sex ?
BTW : If you register your own name under
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?