Slashdot Mirror
ICANN Selects New Top Level Domains
Azog, joined by a bevy of like-mindeds, wrote with the news: "ICANN has selected several proposals for new TLDs for further negotiation. The selected entries, and their proposed TLDs, are:
JVTeam (.biz), Afilias (.info), Global Name Registry (.name), RegistryPro (.pro), MDMA (.museum), SITA (.aero), and NCBA (.coop)." Here is the
unanimously accepted resolution.
cyrdog points to Wired's coverage, and pavelivanov points to the story at CNET. And as several people have pointed out, .web is conspicously absent, even though it seems like a shoo-in. Someone, somewhere is going to get that one day ... Update: 11/17 09:48 PM by H :Check out SatireWire's coverage as well *grin*.
I have been communicating with the USPTO and DoC about the problem of trademarks on the Internet.
.REG
.food
.us
The World Intellectual Piracy Organization (WIPO.org.uk) has been telling them what they already know.
To make trademarks lawful requires:
1. TM identifier - example
2. Classification identifier - example
3. Country identifier - example
So dominos pizzas in USA would be domino.food.us.reg
They may not like it, but it is the only way to make trademarks comply with law.
Dot coms, dot biz etc. can all still be used. Dot REG would act as certificate of authentication.
No it's not, asshole! IP addresses of hosts within a network change, a naming system needs to stand one layer higher to allow the owner of the network some flexibility. IP addresses have all sorts of problems for use as host names, multiple hosts per IP, multiple IPs per host and so on.
And also because when you just hear about a company 'Underplunder, Inc.' you don't have to suck out of your finger some name, but can just try underplunder.com and you might get your match...
Which is exactly why the current system is breaking down. What if there is another Underplunder Inc? The current system assumes that there is one such name per country plus a handful of "special" ones which get .net, .com or .org. This was fine when the net was small but is just useless under the assumption that everyone has, or can have, their own site. How many names for companies or people are there? There must be duplication in any letter-based system.
The assumption that people can't remember numbers is wrong (well, for most of us, anyway), as shown by telephone numbers, and numbers avoid almost all the problems with the current DNS.
Wake up: DNS is disintegrating as we speak and ICANN is not helping. What do you think is the solution?
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Well, certainly ".kids" has some difficulties, but I don't see what's wrong with .adult or .xxx. I don't think they need to be enforced strictly (running all the pornographic .coms to .adult for example), but I do think there are porn merchants out there who would move to the new TLD. For one it gives people a better idea of the content of a site, for another, it can help parents keep their kids from looking at smut online (not that it'll stop them, but it would help).
That's the DUMBEST bunch of TLDs I've ever heard. Cripes, they had a chance to make some truly cool/interesting new domains that would make people actually want to get non-dot-com names, thereby helping those businesses as well as reducing load on the top level serers.
Instead, they cluttered the namespace with a bunch of lame crap. Who put them in charge, again?
The real problem is the lack of accountability with ICANN. When they were set up a board of directors was appointed who had to step down after a certain period. In an attempt to show openness they launched the At-Large campaign where web users could register and elect new directors.
So they had the election and discovered that the web users voted in the strongest critics of ICANN. Oh, dear, a problem, the ICANN board got around this by tweeking the interpretation of the rules such that the new directors would be unable to vote until after the next AGM. They also voted themselves an extension of the time in which they can stay in office. There is even talk now about reducing the number of elected officials in the future. BTW I have an enormous respect for some of the current directors so don't tar them all with the same brush.
There was a great article on Slashdot only a couple of days ago about an analysis of the domain dispute policy. This pointed out in no uncertain terms how the system favoured the complainer in that they could select the resolution body and surprise the bodies which ruled most frequently for the complainant got the most work.
I am from the UK and have concerns about an organisation which is based in the US and subject to US laws controlling such an important area of the Internet as the actions of that body will be determined by what is regarded as acceptable to the residents of North America and not myself. With the existing .ORG, .COM and .NET (ignoring the others for the moment) domains there is little problem as there are no 'rules' about what someone can do with them after registration. With the new ones which are coming out things will be different. Consider museum, who decides what is permitted to be registered ? ICANN along with MDMA. There ***will*** be disagreements as to what contitutes a museum particually when different languages and national laws are involved. Can you see North Korea happily accepting the decision made by ICANN in regard to an application. Anyway who gives them the right to do this? - themselves.
According to the CNET site, the .name register will operate under the "Laws of England and Whales". Doesn't this discrimainate against Porpoises, Dolphins and other aquatic mammals?
FP
I see a couple of useful TLDs that have been thrown out, however I haven't even seen a proposal put forward for .aol! I can't imagine a more useful TLD, it would make it so much easier to write all your filtering software. As soon as all usenet feeds and discussion groups, not to mention irc start dropping everything that comes from the .aol domain the average iq of the net would probably double overnight. Meanwhile everything inside .aol would have their own 'value added' services to keep them satified with 'the internet' still so everyone would be happy,\.
Now, open the Real-Time Chat Log and do a search for: "Oh. My." (spoken by Christopher Ambler) and read along after watching the video! See as Vint Cerf goes into "attack-mode" and takes on Louis Touton and Joe Sims.
Check out Christopher Ambler and the chat-room's reaction to the whole thing! Incredible and hilarious at the same time! Watch the look on the Board Member's faces when they realize that Afilias isn't going to get .web!
Take that NSI !!!!!
And as several people have pointed out, .web is conspicously[sic] absent, even though it seems like a shoo-in.
Why do some feel the need for a .WEB TLD?
The TLD is not the correct logical place for it. It is completely redundant, the current domain model already has the capability of distinguishing a web server from a smtp or ftp server.
Consider the URI http://www.website.web
http:// - Web protocol
www - Web server
.website - Domain
.web - web tld
This is just ridiculous OTT.
What happens when these domains want a ftp or smtp server? Do they use webmaster@website.web or ftp://ftp.website.web or do we add yet more TLD's i.e. .ftp and .smtp TLD's so we have webmaster@website.smtp and ftp://ftp.website.ftp
Ah The whole idea of .web is just absurd.
Someone, somewhere is going to get that one day ...
I certainly hope not, because that is the day commercialism has finally over taken technical merit.
I work for you now Harry. You say drink coffee...I drink coffee.
Agent Dale Cooper "Twin Peaks"
It would certainly be beneficial if they had created a .tm domain for trademarks. That would certainly clarify the way trademarks relate to web pages, and could provide a nice niche that prevented corporate trademark overprotection from spreading into comic and unrelated domain names.
not all bad then :]
t.
Better yet, how about a .exe domain!! My hands will tremble!
(barf barf)
ok, I don't like .coop at all. It took me quite a bit of thinking about it before I realized that it should be .co-op, a domain for cooperatives. .coop just seems like a TLD suited for chickens and I don't know too many chickens who use computers.
_____________
I don't want free as in beer. I just want free beer.
I don't think that having a domain name for this is useful. Bluetooth and other technologies will certainly evolve protocols for tackling all of these examples and more, and they probably won't have anything to do with domain names.
The DNS-system scales very well for the exact reason that it's heirarchical. As of now there is 248 TLD's (DNS & BIND, Poul Albitz and Cricket Liu, O'Reilly Books) and DNS is not even close to being the bottleneck. .com: "Owning" a word. Who gets "Sun" as a keyword? "Linux"? "Windows"? So either way we're doomed..
That being said, I don't believe it's viable to have arbitrary TLD's. It would cause even more disputes over who gets which name. And a popular TLD would need to be hosted on a solid NS. I doubt most ordinary (and yes, ultra-geeks are included here) people have the ability, bandwidth and hardware to do this.
And for the keyword idea.. It all comes down to the same as
Remember, there are no stupid questions. But there are a lot of inquisitive idiots.
(Note - only UK slashdotters will understand this. Aero is a popular UK chocolate bar).
Do you think I'll get sued?
--
Find free books.
People, IME, tend to be good at associating names with things and less good at associating numbers-- which is why we name, rather than number, files... and cities and computers and children. (The only exception is the telephone system, and even there, people advertise using names of the form 1-800-FOOBAR-7.) I think we'd be losing something valuable if we changed names to numbers:
And so we rather than try to resolve the dispute, we decide they're not to be trusted with it, and lose all this? Such a move would be restricting easy access to the net to those of us who are trained to find it easy to work with and remember apparently random strings of digits. Yes, your solution works... but it appears to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
GROGGS: alive and well and living in
At least "aero" is intuitive ... the rest are pretty damn stupid.
.pro ??
Sorry, (makes mental note: read what you are writing).
.arpa's closed? I got 7 hits from an .apra domain last week to my website.
Correction follows:
Richy C.
--
You're correct, of course -- there are more record stores in Fargo than that. We also have a movie theatre that might show an NC-17 movie every now and again, too. But the situation is not as rosy as you paint. You really don't find NC-17 or unrated movies at Blockbuster or at the local theatre chain. You're really not going to find an uncut Eminem or Bloodhound gang album at Target or Wal-Mart.
.xxx sites, you haven't been paying attention. A lot of site we would never consider porn will be labled .xxx, and a lot of major carriers will block those sites. It will happen just like it happened with "voluntary" X and NC-17 ratings on movies, and with Tipper Gore's "voluntary" record labels. And people will be suprised.
People who reluctantly agree with "voluntary labeling" are often very, very suprised what type of crap actually ends up getting labled. They're also very suprised when that labled stuff really does become difficult to find. Everyone thinks "voluntary labeling won't be so bad. They'll only label the really nasty bad stuff. They won't go overboard and label anything remotely offensive." Then, they're suprised when a movies Crash or Eyes Wide Cut gets "bad" labels stuck on.
Then, they think "well, the label is there to warn parents. Major content distributors won't start indiscriminantly filtering out anything with a label. Thats not what the labels are for!" Then, they're suprised when providers like Blockbuster and WalMart and the major theatre chains put a block on anything with the label.
If you don't think the same thing would happen with
Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.
MDMA is Ecstacy!
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Exactly, a wodge of domain names chosen by committee, thus ensuring a lack of completeness, consistency or forethought. Why .museum and no .gallery or .theatre, and why not put such specialized ones under a general .inst (institute) ??
I'll be intrigued to see how john.smith.name
gets allocated too... ( I can't see any acceptable
way to disambiguate that works, you won't be able to guess someone's domain without some sort of unique ID )
Why can't .coop be under .org anyhow? I thought
that was what it was for!
The whole thing is ill-thought out and betrays a lack of any common sense... We are doomed!
These are in fact the WORST domain names that are so short-sighted, people are gonna start registerting troll names( compaq.contoura.aero - the only website named after a laptop!) for fun.
.aero, wont most .aero sites be named after big airline companies? They might as well just stick to .com or that even more redundant .biz. I doubt many ultralight aviation enthusiasts are gonna use it.
.org be better than .museum? I mean, I don't see museums being more businessy, but more so educational and preservers of history.
.pro? I'll register sex.pro or counterstrike.pro, and i've just anonuced my superiority to the web! Really, we don't need a class-system for domain names on the web. If so, at least have .novice for people who want to register low-self-esteemed websites.
I mean, with
.coop? WTF? I'm thinking grocery stores, or better yet c.everett.coop - shit, I better buy that one before Mr. Surgeon General gets it!
Wouldnt
.pro. Uh, pro what? Can I just declare myself a
.name? Uh. tha'ts like having 1-800-PHONE-NUMBER.
any ideas why the world's morality filter delimmas weren't solved with a simple suffix? it would have been so easy.
---
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
Oh dear. I have just realised that this has turned into a "me too" post. Bugger.
"The new wave is not value-added; it's garbage-subtracted" - Esther Dyson, Dec 1994
domain names like guinnessbeersucks.com should be legal. until this problem is addressed, we are all slaves.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
There is no
> and NCBA (.coop)
Do chickens really *need* their own TLD?
Chris Mattern
What a huge raft of crap. ICANN sucks!
Several programs, such as tld lookups, dont consider strings longer than 3 chars to be valid TLD's. Of course, it's possible to port them, but it's annoying as hell.
I am !amused.
.tm is the code for Turkmenistan.
[TMB]
[SARCASM].museum? there's a broad ranging area worthy of a TLD of its own.[/SARCASM] Yes, it's great that museums could have their own web identifier, sure. But it's simply not a big enough segment of the net population to warrant a TLD. Even if there are a million museums in the world that are registering I wouldn't consider it a big enough market.
The same arguement can be said for .aero, and probably for .coop.
bureaucracy at work. *sigh*.
-chad/entropi
Is it just me or does this seem like a weak start for new TLDs? My guess is that these new TLDs will become the ghetto of domain names. Real businesses will have .com domains, and wannabes will have .biz. But new TLDs are always good, because they remove an artificial scarcity that damages small websites.
As an FYI, SITA is one of the largest and oldest computer network companies in the world that until recently exclusively served the worlds airline industry. .areo TLD.
Given that most of the worlds airlines already have domain names, it will be interesting to see if there will be a shift to the
This is a boring sig
I'm sure you'll agree that would make life much easier for everyone.
Does it make you happy you're so strange?
This is silly. How many telephone numbers can you remember? That's why people have palm pilots and address books - to associate NUMBERS with NAMES. If I call my buddy Andy enough times, sure I'll remember the number - just like I know the IP addresses of my ISPs name servers. That's not true for most of the people I need to call from time to time, and not true for the majority of web sites I visit.
Instituting this scheme would without a doubt result in numerous "real names" like services - proprietary name-to-number mapping sites that would be much worse than the current DNS system, which at least is global.
Everyone knows that damage is done to the soul by bad motion pictures. -Pope Pius XI
It is apparent from the nature and inconsistancy in the recently adopted TLDs that the DNS needs to be changed to help simplify the process of resolving a name to the desired address, and shift the DNS away for its bias toward the US.
Maybe the DNS structure could be changed to shift responsibility to nationalities. One possibility may be something like 'host.subdomain.country' (similar to how it is outside the US now), where the subdomains would be '.com', '.org', etc., and optional, and designated by each country respectively. The DNS protocol could updated to append a country code to a DNS query if none was present before resolving the query or passing the query on. Which country code would be appended would depend on the physical origin of the request. The DNS works in a mannor similar to this now, and it would not be difficult to make this kind of system a standard part of how the DNS protocol works.
By making the DNS structure the same for the US as for other countries, the need for one body to administer TLDs for all countries is greatly reduced. By instituting the procedure of appending the country domain to the domain name, things are simplified and there is backward compatability.
The domain names from within the United States, for example, would look something like 'IBM.com.us' (or 'IBM.com' from within the US), 'IBM.info.us', 'IBM.net.us', or 'IBM.us'. United States government sites would look like 'whitehouse.gov.us', or 'whitehouse.us'.
Each country would be free to create and administer its own subdomain structure (for better or worse) thus releiving one organization from the task of administering TLDs for many countries. The only real TLDs would be for countries.
This, of course, would mean that an entity would have to register their domain in every country, but isn't that how trademarks work now, and isn't there an existing body of law to deal with conflicts arising from registering a trademark in use by somebody else in another country. This would releive ICANN from the task of figuring out who should be responsible for which '.com', '.biz' or '.org' TLDs for all countries.
Whether this proposal makes sense or not, it would be better for DNS to be extended now rather than have it supplanted by some closed replacement. Given the direction (or lack thereof) the administering of TLDs is taking, this eventuality is becomming more likely. There is a genuine need to update the DNS.
"We are all geniuses when we dream"
- E.M. Cioran
uhhhhhmmmmm kind o' metal ain't it, boy?
Okay, so, now where do I go to register chicken.coop?!
They're too long to easily remember, difficult to convey over the phone, frequently mistyped, and generally just darn inconvenient. That's why people want top-level TLD's in the first place.
Yes, maybe such a setup does make sense in some abstract fashion. So might 50-digit telephone numbers. But in most real world cases that really doesn't matter. Convenience and familiarity win every time--as they should.
-Bryan
Is this the same way we've been handed .CC, the steaming pile of shit that it is? If this is the case why doesn't Taco just go and start .dot like he wants? Wouldn't ICANN pretty much go the way of the horse and carriage if everyone did this?
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
-Jaron Lanier
Maybe they should do this with .biz, at least then it would be an improvement over .com - catergorised domain names.
.com (commercial), .biz (business) & .pro (professional) supposed to be?
.rx for pharmaceutical???)
Anyway, what's the distinction between
(BTW, why on earth is it
[Happosai]
If anything, I would think it the first to get pitched, and the last to ever make it to be a TLD. Why? Well, can you be ANY more redundant? It's even worse that .ws for "web site".
OF COURSE it's a web site. OF COURSE it's on the web. How do you bloody well think you got to it? Archie? Gopher?? No, the WEB. Everyone knows it's the web. Everyone knows it's called a website. Sheesh.
"There's a party," she said,
"We'll sing and we'll dance,
It's come as you are."
.npo.pro? What exactly does it mean to be professionally non-profit?
[TMB]
Actually....you could make an argument either way. Look at it this way. "Ecstacy" (X, E, or whatever you want to call it) is a street drug. It is USUALLY (probably about 95% of the time or so) just MDMA and nothing else....
:)
However, it is sometimes mixed with Meth, or is just MDA with no MDMA, Hell I have even heard of DOB being sold under that name (man, talk about a problem waiting to happen!)
So one could argue that MDMA is a street name for several several different possible drug combonations - usually mostly MDMA, but not always.
In any case...it has nothing to do with new TLDs but...I did think it was cool - it was the first thing _I_ thought of when I saw "MDMA" in the article
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
I tend to disagree with you there. The primary function of DNS was to create a way to make it easier for humans to work with the growing number of hosts on the Internet. TCP/IP addresses were to hard to remember, so a number of systems evolved - two big ones were NIS and DNS.
That being said, what do you think would happen if you asked someone what dot-com stands for? How about dot-int? Or dot-org? You and I know, but non-technical folk? Most probably don't have a clue what they mean. I'm sure all here would agree with me on that. Maybe a UUNET type naming scheming isn't exactly the answer either, but something easier can be done - base it on simpler TLD names.
If I were a consumer and wanted to find a web site on Ford cars for example, what would I rather type that would make more sense to me? Probably
ford.cars
not
www.ford.com
Doing this rules out any other Ford company confusion because we know that we are looking for the ford company that makes cars. It also takes the hostname (typically www) out of the picture so that the user has less to type.
Is this something that can already be accomplished in DNS (ford.cars). Yes, if they added the dot-cars TLD (for example). Why not dot-travel? Or dot-family? Or dot-adult? These make sense and it would be easier for the consumer.
From experience, I can say that it is definitely possible, and would definitely be wanted by consumers.
Furthermore, we can't just dump DNS because of the two single most important uses of the Internet Email and Web addresses. We've gotten everyone used to DNS, we must figure out a way to change it into something else. I think that by opening TLDs (as opposed to limiting them), is the beginning of the reform.
Chris
-= www.opendnstech.com =-
- .TXT
What's it for? It's a TLD specifically oriented towards browsers that cannot display graphics, tables, frames, etc., for things like lynx browsers (nice and fast, if klunky) and 'net-enabled appliances like phones and PDA's and such.I know there's software out there that take a site and strips it down to the bare minimum for said devices/browsers, but wouldn't it be nice to have an entire TLD dedicated to these? A nice, direct method of publishing information without having to bother with cutesy web interfaces, animated GIFs, pop-up windows, and goatse.cx.
"There's a party," she said,
"We'll sing and we'll dance,
It's come as you are."
http://www.yelm.freeserve.co.uk/dns/ to see what I mean.
I mean FFS, .aero just for the travel industry? How trivially moronic. These TLD are little more than ego masturbation. They are not going to do anything to sort out the utter fucking chaos which has ensued in .com, .net and .org.
Deleted
www.s.coop
"Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi"
weave.nom maybe, weave.name -- never....
(1) Strict rules about who can register a domain-name in a particular TLD space (e.g., a .com _must_ be a _legitimate_ registered business, an .edu _must_ be an established and _accredited_ educational institution
.edu would be better as .edu.us/.ac.us/etc.
But at the same time only if there is a good reason for not having an apropriate geographic domain name. e.g. most of
(2) each domain must be the _only_ domain owned by a specific business or other entity (no fair buying up everything that's similar, no registering multiple identities)
There is a fine line between a company being "domain grabbing" and one which simply wishes to use it's normal trading identities. The line is especially blurred with a startup "e-business".
Nobody could ever agree over who should arbitrate ".kids" or ".web.", but there are very specific groups to go to for things like ".museum". Groups that already have the organization and infrastructure to handle the chore of assigning names for a whole TLD.
The MDMA that pushed for .museum is an organization composed mostly of the International Council of Museums (ICOM), which itself is a working unit of the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). There's not a more organized professional group in the world than ICOM. They have the people, determination, and management skills to get it done, ergo they got it done. I say good for them.
Why .museum instead of sticking to .org? Because of the museum community's keen sense of group identity. Rightly or wrongly, they like to decide among themselves who gets sanctioned to wear the MUSEUM label. Joe Bob's sideshow with the two-headed rattlesnakes out in Arizona doesn't make the cut.
Why .museum instead of .art? Because not all museums are art museums. Remember there are lots of museums that do all kinds of things, and lots that stick to natural history or straight history history.
Why .museum instead of .mus? Because "museum" is a latin noun that means the same thing all over the Western world and is generally a recognizably assimilated word in non-Western languages. Also, there are other parties who wouldn't be so quick to give up .mus (think "music"). How hard do you suppose the RIAA is going to fight for that?
So, short story long, these are the new domains we got because these are the ones that organized people cared enough to fill out the paperwork for. Next time they ask, be ready.
Ned Flanders, I mock your value system. You also appear foolish to the eyes of others.
This proof of concept seems designed to prove that it is a pretty lame concept... These particular TLDs are quite lame. Of course, that probably won't stop people from buying them, for no good reason.
/. fashion. THESE TLDs would prove the concept AND maintain the spirit of the Internet:
.cums" and people would merely think they have a funny accent...
Now, as for the TLDs *I* think should be registered, in true "I know more than they do"
.cum - Then people who work at sex sites could casually mention that they work at "one of those
.borg - For anyone who has been assimilated... you know, Microsoft ISVs, OEMs, developers, etc...
.nut - For sites featuring rants, conspiracy theories, pictures of people's pets with captions drawn in using Microsoft Paint, etc.
.kil - For Quake servers and towns named after Dutch rivers...
.guv - For people who want to run their own countries but can't find one that will let them...
also can be used by stereotyped British butlers...
Also, since we know Aliens are among us, shouldn't we have planetary/stellar codes in addition to country codes?
For more info go to: www.wecomeinpeace.mars
o/~ we are pissed, we are pissed, we have to resist... o/~ - ec8or
Oldest? Of course not. The solution to who gets the domain will be the fairest, most equitable, most reasonable, and most common solution know to man.
The person who can afford to hire the best lawyers.
What could be the possible reason for using 'dot-slash' as a TLD? I won't even begin to comment on how stupid and sad that would be as a TLD, so I'm assuming the poster meant to be funny and some moderator didn't quite pick up on it.
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
Incorrect. This is the third or fourth time new TLDs have been added. It is the first time new TLDs have been added in over a decade, I'll grant that.
Edith Keeler Must Die
I say, it's about time.
Edith Keeler Must Die
Does there really need to be a slashdot.org, slashdot.com slashdot.net slashdot.info slashdot.biz slashdot.name slashdot.pro slashdot.aero slashdot.coop and God knows whatever else?
Is this a transparent attempt for more cash as people will have to register not 3, but a large handful of domain names now to prevent their site from being taken advantage of?
Drop the tld altogether. I know it won't happen, but it would be nice to just go to a site by it's name, and when you find a name, just use it instead of every possible combination.
________
Considering that the majority of web users have gotten used to seeing 3-letter tld's, this should be pretty amusing. More of note is how specific any given tld is- .aero? Yeah, that'll benefit MAYBE 1% of web users, never mind that the other 99% might have expected the traditional three letters. I still would have liked to see a .web since .net never caught on and at least .web might have some added publicity, and maybe a .k12- I'll never forget when my hs tried to register for a .org domain name and found that THEY were being cybersquatted on, by a student! (remember, only colleges and universities can have .edu for reasons beyond me... whoops). Well, it'll be interesting... assuming that most sites don't immediately go out and protect their backs by buying all the new variations too (slashdot.(dot).info.aero, anyone?). What next, .specialinterest?
Because in places like Canada, in order to get a .ca domain, you have to be nationally registered, which means you have a business office in
more than one province or pay $200 to be nationally registered. Otherwise you get stuck with a lame .bc.ca or .ca
.de domain names were at one time understood by the (West) German post office. Thus if you put someone's email address on "snail mail" it would get to them.
An entirely sensible policy. Have the domain name give some clue as to where the company is and where it is likely to do business. Indeed there is a story that
I also prefer the three-letter ones, just in consistency.
Erm http://news.bbc.co.uk/ , http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/ ...
"The Internet is American. English only, please." - saweeeet@aol.com in Cuban newsgroup
CowboyNeal for president!
"Hit any user to continue."
My personal favourite was "alt.sadistic.dentists.drill.drill.drill"
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
Take .travel... travel sites (planning, booking, etc) are the most popular business destinations.
Similarly, a .net and .host would also be excellent additions.
But no, we get .biz... yeah, so corps now need to all go out and register their corresponding .biz, or sue whoever got there first, because, after all, .biz and .com are so similar in function I can just see tm dilution and confusion written all over .biz
I won't even comment on .coop... Perhaps .co-op works better, otherwise it's just k-ooh-p.
Really, given the amount of time, money and exposure this process received I', very disappointed that's all we got.
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
--
$you = new YOU;
$you = new YOU;
honk() if $you->love(perl)
They also talk quite a lot about using open-source in the technical section.
Paul M
"There are no innocent bystanders. What where they doing there in the first place"
Paul M
"There are no innocent bystanders. What where they doing there in the first place"
William S Burroughs
Despite all the previewing I missed that one... that should be .reg and .host...
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
I mean really, come on! Give me some .ass!!!
.museum, .coop, and .aero
.ass es
I can see it now...
cocacolacaneatmy.ass
ronaldmcdonaldtakesitinthe.ass
billclintondoesnthavetopayforsome.ass
icannneedstoremoveitsehadfromits.ass
isuck.ass
microsoft.ass
Surely no one could be as asinine as to create TLDs like
These people need to walk out of their offices and talk to real human beings (not lifeless bloodsucking marketing agents) and maybe, just maybe they'll ge their heads out of their
.aero - Why does the aerospace industry need their own TLD? What are they doing online (besides operating their own TLD registry) that merits a TLD more than, say, the banking industry?
It looks as though ICANN's criteria as "Are we happy with the proposer operating as a TLD registry" rather than "Is their proposal sensible".
ICANN's new TLD choices are more lame than I'd expected. I figured on some heavy-hitting TLDs like .WEB and .NOM or even .TEL. Instead ICANN chose what amounts to token TLDs...because for all intensive purposes the new TLDs will have limited appeal and usefulness...for example:
.COM and in the eye of some people .biz has negative connotations and will instill images of con artists and second rate businesses in their minds; many people will feel that real business uses .COM
.NOM would have been a much better choice...why did ICANN pick .name over .nom??
.museum - why so many limited use TLDs...doesn't make sense to me.
.name in the sense that .pro is also aimed towards individuals - many people who register their name in .name will also do so in .pro.
.COM's dominance is not threatened in any way from these new TLDs...in fact the contrary will be true....COM will be more valuable and sought than ever before. Thanks again ICANN for keeping .COM #1!!
museum: How many people will actually use that TLD?
Heck, many people can't even spell museum!
biz: redundant to
.info: Actually not a bad TLD...but certainly not a top TLD choice in my view since its appeal will be limited.
.name: Terrible!!
.aero: About as limited as
.pro: Seems redundant to
.coop: The most ridiculous TLD of the bunch...some ICANN folks flew the coop when they chose to approve this one...coop is a totally useless TLD.
Bottom line is that
I want john@john.smith.name... No matter what you do for names it is going to be redundent (unless you wanted to get sexist and do mrs@john.smith.name.) The only real use is for websites and even that has a limited market (most people want to keep their identity on the Internet secret, though that may change soon.) Owen
--- Humm...
Bin is not hard coded for the ICANN roots and it is easy to change (very easy) but the difficulty is Windows. Any new DNS system has to face the fact that >80% of computers come with Windows and that the vast bulk of net users today are using Windows.
How many Windows setups have any reference to the root servers. This is one of the things which MS has liked to pass off onto proper systems.
Helllloooo!
There is no "porting of software" required to support the new TLDs.
If your software breaks on a new TLD, IT IS ALREADY BROKEN!
That's not a port, that's a bug fix. Tough tootsies.
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
To try it out, I put a .hom record on granitecanyon and told my local nameserver to forward all "hom" requests to their nameserver. `nslookup` picked up my new entry no problem and still gets all the .com's the old way just as it has before. I also read the ".hom" site with my browser just to make sure.
Of course, people have to consciously act to be able to access these domains, but we have to start somewhere. With enough momentum, the Linux distributions might pick up the lines in their config files.
For the simple details of how I did this and some suggestions for how to regulate these spaces see this page.
Note: I don't necessarily suggest we use granitecanyon specifically, or that we don't at least consult with their admins first.
Dot-biz may create a minor stampede, but this will be somewhat lessened by the bleed-off from dot-pro. dot-name is a whole nuther ball of wax.
That being said, there will be some grumbling about the lack of concrete dispute resolution procedures at this stage. There is sure to be some grumbling about the "connected" nature of some of the applications, and if people are not happy with the new registries, that grumbling will be loud. It remains to be seen whether or not these criticisms will be deserved.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
or own the trademark on a word.....
~ a low user id is no indication I have a clue what I'm talking about.
But why isn't it .air [or .aer] and .mus?
.333 naming system.
This makes more sense, and keeps with the current
-bZj
.sig
A red DNS server? What does the colour have to do with it?
I think you mean rogue.
DanceSafe.org
Check out what's really in your pill
The ratio of street pills is closing in on 50/50 MDMA only/other crap. More and more, you're starting to see crazy stuff like PCP sold as "E". I took a pill about a month ago that was mostly mescaline. Not entirely unpleasant, but very different the evening I was expecting to have.
-B
Why? Christmas isn't anywhere near Easter either. ;)
-David T. C.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
I want to register ca.ca
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
You've ever heard about IPv6?
Wake up: DNS is disintegrating as we speak and ICANN is not helping. What do you think is the solution?
Well... DNS is fine, its just US domains that are the pain. And even... unless you will get some change to the whole concept, you hardly get any improvement. Search engines can help here some.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
I think alot of people are going to get quite confused buy all these new TLD's....it's jsut more crap to memorize and remember.
Set up your own local DNS or NIS server, you idiot. That's how companies do intranets, there's no need for world-wide naming conventions to handle local entities -- that's why they have LOCAL area networks attached to this horrendously sloth-like WAN.
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
ICANN Cannot
http://www.open-rsc.org/icannot.pdf ;There is plenty of room for everyone.
aren't you ignorant?
I live in a housing cooperative in Chicago and I've found it very rewarding.
Plus there was a story about spindletop, the open-source hardware thingie, earlier this week that runs on coop principles
from http://www.umich.edu/~nasco/main_coop.h tml :
What is a Co-op?
A cooperative is a business controlled by the people who use it. It is a democratic organization whose earnings and assets belong to its members. By patronizing and becoming an active member of a co-op, you invest yourself with the power to shape that business. You control the politics and economics of what is truly your organization.
This localized member control allows co-ops to be as varied as the people they serve. Thus, there are different types of co-ops including: food co-ops, housing co-ops, arts and crafts co-ops, book co-ops, bakery co-ops, bike co-ops, farm co-ops, rural electric co-ops, financial co-ops (credit unions), and insurance co-ops. And each of these has a flavor of its own, reflective of the desires of its individual memberships. Despite the diversity in type and tradition of co-ops, most have several things in common, particularly the ideals and principles from which they emerge.
not "totally useless" at all
It is hard to think of a bunch of web-companies with better business plans than the porn sites; the more popular ones also have the best technical skills and admin systems on the web; they have to to cope with the traffic. So: why no .xxx?
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
rx is an abbreviation in the pharmaceutical industry for a Prescription. Alteration of a symbol used in prescriptions (looks like Rx), abbreviation of Latin recipe
Like I said before in the last ICANN article, why don't you go to ICANN's site and read why the .kids and .xxx applications were rejected.
.kids and .xxx. They said they had reservations about the ability of the particular companies to implement and manage them _successfully_, both in regards to technical work and content management.
They (*gasp*) actually do have reasons. And remember, this isn't a contest - "What would be the coolest new tld". There are proposals from individual companies to be based on their merits.
ICANN did not say they disagree with the idea behind
But please, don't take my word for it, get it from the source...
After scanning the proposal it looks like it will be .air not .aero. Maybe slashdot should apply for hot.air =).
Blog
A TLD for a chocolate bar? Pardon me while I giggle uncontrollably.
Need Mercedes parts ?
The Bloodhound Gang is dangerous! "Almost arbitrary labels" are good! But you'd think the clickety-click morons would at least see the link back to slashdot as a big, flashing, neon "Joke, joke!" sign! It's rich enough to forgive the goatse link!
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Yeah, baby!
There should at least be an .adu that web designers choose voluntarily, homes for pages the web site owners don't want kids to see. It doesn't necessarily have to be a porn site, but focus around mature, adult-oriented issues. Easily filtered. So why have these adult names been rejected in part because of the "controversy" surrounding them? Are people insisting on limiting adult pages to these special domain names?
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
Look for ENUM .. coming soon to a TLD domain monopoly near you ..
...as of November 1, 2000, the laws regarding .ca domain registrations have been changed: it's as open as .com now. .ca registrars. And hurry! :)
Check Tucows.ca for a list of valid
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
I PROTEST THIS BOGUS MODERATION
.XXX" argument that I have yet read. Perhaps the complete dumbass who assigned this post Troll should spend some time looking up the meanings of irony, sarcasm and parody; that is, of course assuming they can even read at all. The thought that someone might look at this post and pass it by based on the moderation alone -- especially somone who hasn't considered all the sides of the argument against .XXX -- makes me ill. I just hope this joker of a moderator eats it in M2.
This "Troll" of a post is perhaps one of the most incisive indictments of the "force everyone to use
Actually, I think most will be for small companies.
I can think of two reasons for it:
Someone perceives a need to be certain sites belong to someone in the industry (both for customers and business to business (think filtering)) and perhaps the companies in the industry it will be easier to deal with a friendly registrar (friendlier because it's actually part of the industry and the same rule applies to all instead of different national rules).
Now that is a really interesting question! For some categories in some nations there really are processes whereby you can become a certificated professional. Those cases are easy (provided the registrar can get a contact in each nation for each category). But what about the others? Simply don't let anyone register in them (not good for the cash flow) or let almost anyone register (not good for the perceived quality of being in the TLD)?
What advantage is law.pro over law.com?
Need Mercedes parts ?
If you survey the DNS landscape you'll notice that there is a worldwide trend away from multi level domains as all the cctlds scramble to do away with this.that.the-other.cctld. They're dropping like flies. I postulate .com did so well because you could get anything-you-want.com.
Domains seem to work best verb adjective noun.
Verb is like "goto"
A trademark has to be a adjective and has to have a noun. This is how you get many trademarks in different categories.
Need Mercedes parts ?
The intellectual property community does not see a need for new tlds. If you watch the ICANN meeting in RealVideo you can see which people sitting up at the front are pawn of the trademark wonks and which ones actually have some backbone.
Need Mercedes parts ?
From the article:
.xxx or .sex they dont have any appeal to major industry - just evil pornography peddlers - g-darn sinners all.
New domains approved by the board are subject to approval by the Department of Commerce
Nice to see the 'net has become an arm of the American Corporatist army - what the hell does the Commerce industry have to do with it? Maybe thats why you wont see
Karl Aurbach, the newly elected ICANN board member has workd with a couple of people and tested over a million tlds. It works just fine. You can reach karl at karl@the.web.
Need Mercedes parts ?
If folks consider this some ultra-elite domain extension reserved for companies whose main business is their web site, then I still disagree with its inception unless we also get .tennisball, .harddrive, .femininenapkin, etc
...along with the dirt museam and the Amish quilt museum Intercourse Pennsylvania.
I see a great need.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Let's take an example. AOL owns aol.com, aol.net and aol.org. I assume they own other stuff like the country names, but I didn't bother checking. Aol will buy up aol.pro, aol.biz, aol.aero, aol.museum etc...as soon as they come out. If you attempt to register those names, they will sue your ass into the ground.
:)
This is essentially an exercise in getting every big company to shell out an extra $35*number_of_new_TLDs per_year to the registrars.
What makes anyone here think that anyone except the companies that already own the whatever_name.com addresses will get any of the new addresses?
So, the new TLD's are already "mined out". This is just a brilliant plan to give the registrars more bucks.
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!
Once a year seems like a safe bet, that's IF the Department of Commerce takes their suggestion to add the current new tlds that's IF theyt survice the negition round with "staph". Remember, ICANN has no authority to add new TLDs. Only the Department of Commerce does.
There is no technical limit to the number of new tlds. There are operational contrasints however: you'd better have OC48's on the root servers if you get much about several million tlds. Other than that it just scales away merrily.
Need Mercedes parts ?
I consider myself familiar with the web. I can sorta guess what .info and .biz are for. But I cannot work out what kind of domains are supposed to go under .pro .aero and .coop. Are our dairy farmers cooperative going to buy a .coop domain? Is .pro for providers or professionals?
Now, the biggest problem is, how am I going to explain these concepts to my grandmother?
---
Bor am I confused. I thought icann.ad.nausum was a shoe in.
Need Mercedes parts ?
There apparently was/is a "rouge" DNS server handling the .web TLD, though not everyone elses DNS servers point to it. Some do, apparently, thus creating the "unofficial" status.
Esther Dysan, when asked in the first ICANN meeting two years ago in Boston told us that she was picked by Roger Cochettu of IBM (now a VP of NSI oops "verisgn") and Ira Magaziner. This is particularly loathsme as throughout ther next year at IFWP ("International Meetings for the White Paper") meetings in Restin, Geneva and Singapore each meeting was opened by Ira who kept asserting "you people have to decide the structure and pick the board". There was supposed to be a rourth *wrap up* meeting of IFWP where all the consensus points from these metings were to be rolled into a final set of documents that were to be the incorporation of "newco" and board members were to be picked by the comunity. But that fourth meeting eas scuttled by non other than Mike Roberts who was there as head of EDUCAUSE but who had already been told queitly "don't worry, we already have a board and you get to be prez". So we were sandbagged by Ira Magaziner just coming down from a jag of being sued over the health care debacle. Where are then now? Well, Ira has formed an Internet consultancy with Paul Twomey the had of ICANN's aptly named GAC ("Government advisory committee".)
Have interest will conflict.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Apparently, it's not just a matter of their saying "gee, a .foo would be cool," but it's a matter of giving the new .foo over to the person/organization who submitted the proposal.
They dropped .xxx and .kids because the applicants weren't competent to run a registry service.
So, it didn't come down to logical divisions, but to registrars. Just like .mil is managed by one organization (DoD), so would .xxx or .kids.
Personally, I am glad ".kids" didn't make it. It's an idiomatic word. (Is it related to that infamous .cx image?). I also prefer the three-letter ones, just in consistency.
I also didn't like the .web thing. Isn't the www. convention enough? Or would Foobar Inc., need to move their web presence to some new toplevel domain?
[
Aurbach "How I would decide TLDS if I were seated"s p?s=cyber&dir=icann&file=icann-111500&star t=10-31-32
s p?s=cyber&dir=icann&file=icann-111500&star t=10-35-51
s p?s=cyber&dir=icann&file=icann-111500&star t=10-39-10
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/scripts/rammaker.a
Me: ".XXX"
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/scripts/rammaker.a
Peter Dengate Thrush: "We (cctlds) may look for other root servers"
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/scripts/rammaker.a
Need Mercedes parts ?
The second question, even if you just decide to go it alone, is that the current roots will not pass traffic to the new roots, cutting the net in two, because there is now no central authority.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
IOD attended a meeting with IANA in 1996 and was told to deploy the .web registry and charge for registrations. To it's great credit some members of the board (Cerf, Fockler, that Linda woman and smoebody else) said they felt uncomfortable giving .web to somebody else knowing IOD had been pioneering this effort for 4 years. They still had a couple of reservations about IOD app and decided to "reserve" .web for future consideration but were not prepared to give it to the NSI/register.com backed Afilias consortium.
.web to Afilias. Bulldog Cerf stood up to them though in a remarkable display of cojones and .web is safe - for now.
If you watch the RealVideo of this event you'll see ICANN "Staph" (Joe Sims in particular) fighting long and hard to manipulate the board to give
Need Mercedes parts ?
New_TLD.museum
--
The shareholder is always right.
hmm.. I wouldn't exactly put museums as educational. there are museums of the weidest things, and although I would probably learn something from going to say the dinky toy museum or the piggybank museum, I would hardly call it educational.
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
Looks like it's time for more cybersquating, lawsuits and good clean family fun! *gumble* WHY THE #&#@ CANT PEOPLE BE HAPPY WITH .com, .org and .net?!?! (and the few country codes that have been turned into mainstream TLDs, and the 100's of country codes that are still country codes)
I guess that's not enough for you people is it? I rember my good 'ol 300 baud modem..when all we had was 3 TLD's and AOL..what fun...
</rant>
The opinions in this post are ficticious. Any similarity to actual opinions, real or imagined, is purely coincidental.
I can remember my phone number, even though it is 11 digits long with the UK area code, and my computer can remember numbers much longer than that. This is a hint to the solution. Give hosts numbers rather than names. IP addresses, of course, don't work as they change, so a central register of numbers needs to be set up, which in itself is an issue as power corrupts (see ICANN).
I'm thinking of a system where there is a string of digits separated by dots (eg 1.3412.1823), where the initial number would indicate a continent, then the following groups of numbers would be networks of machines, until the final number (1823 in this example) would be a specific machine in the second last network (3412 in the example).
The original authority would be allowed to assign network numbers in the individual continents for a fairly large one-off lifetime fee. The owners of a network number would then be free to assign numbers within their own space at whatever fee they like, but with the provision that the right to sell subnet numbers gets transferred to anyone they assign a number to. So the owner of 1.3412.1823 could assign 1.3412.1823.1 , .2, .3 etc to whoever they liked. Such reselling would be required to be on the same on-off lifetime fee basis (although the fee might be different) as the top level authority.
This way the number resolution can still work in much the same way as name resolution does now, with zones of authority and the work of resolving a number to an IP address is shared out as it is now.
With the top level fee being large, the next level would mostly be ISP's who make money back by selling on at a lower fee per number.
The separation between IPs and host "names" is maintained and ALL the crap about who owns trademarks and shit is lost. Think about it: all the disputes are gone, especially if network owners are required to assign in sequential order.
A distributed system for the very top level would be nice to prevent abuse of power, but perhaps the organisation set up to run it could be held in some sort of trust rather than being a private company. IANAL.
I personally think that something needs to be done or there's only about 5 years life left in the web before the whole thing is bogged down in disputes and namespace is saturated.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Hi; I run the aforementione rogue root server cluster and I can't spell rogue either on any given day but I can spell alternative and that' what I usually call it. I've been doing this for about 5 years now and survived such unmitigated disasters as the Kashopureff era Alternic (RIP) having Dave Crocker send the police to my door and being told by Becky Burr that "we have no problems with alternative roots, we just don't think they're practical". They're apparantly so not practical that there is language in the DOC/NSI cooperative agreement that says "NSI will never run an alternative server". It sure is sweet of Becky to prevent NSI from doing something impractical. Here are some pointers.
If you want to get an overview of our ideas go here http://www.open-rsc.org/
If you want to see our thoughts on the horribly flawed sunrise provision go here http://sunrise.open-rsc.org/
If you want to find how to support or implement the ORSC root go here http://support.open-rsc.org/
If you want to read some alleged words of wisdom go here http://www.open-rsc.org/essays/
If you want to see who is behind this go here http://www.open-rsc.org/about/who/
If you want an easy way to upgrade a windoes bx to use the ORSC root go here http://www.open-rsc.org/setdns/
If you run UNIX (and of course you shoud) and want a root zone you can just plonk down into your config, or just want to read our root zone go here ftp://dns.vrx.net/pub/db.root
We're always looking for people who want to offer alternative stub resolvers for public access. Write to me at richard@dns.list or richard@vrx.net if you want to help or just want more information. I don't really do phone but if you want to call my number is in whois.
Why am I doing this? Well, two reasons. First, I've caused enough trouble on usenet (I, um, sorta created alt.sex) and figure it was time to move on and get on other peoples faces and second Brian Reid convinved me it was a good idea and I always do what Brian says. You should to.
There is a great temptation to paint all the alternative root/tld/stub servers red so they truly are rougue servers. Can anybody suggest a Pantone(TM) color?
Need Mercedes parts ?
root@ns1.vrx.net Sat Nov 18 13:09:37 /home/majordom/lists
# dig here. ns
; > DiG 8.1 > here. ns
;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
;; got answer:
;; ->>HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 2
;; QUERY SECTION:
;; here, type = NS, class = IN
;; ANSWER SECTION:
here. 1d23h46m40s IN NS NS1.BEACHSHORE.NET.
here. 1d23h46m40s IN NS NS1.QUASAR.NET.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
NS1.BEACHSHORE.NET. 6D IN A 199.166.31.250
NS1.QUASAR.NET. 6D IN A 199.166.31.3
;; Total query time: 2 msec
;; FROM: ns1.vrx.net to SERVER: default -- 199.166.24.1
;; WHEN: Sat Nov 18 13:09:40 2000
;; MSG SIZE sent: 22 rcvd: 111
Need Mercedes parts ?
A proof of concept to add new TLDS? Excuse me byt new tlds get added all the time. Ah, but you say those are cctlds. Well, guess what, there is a move underfoot to declare generic tlds such as .nu, .tv, .to etc as generic tlds. So in reality new tlds get added all the time.
Now, of the 258+ cctlds currently in the root how many had to pass muster for technical, business or adminisrative criteria? None. How many started with massive amounts of capital for marketing? None. How many have failed? None.
See, if you're registering into top level domains people are sending you money. When all you have to so is stick two lines of text into a tld zone file for each domain and you get paid to do that it's difficult to imagine how any failure scenario is possible - to say nothing of the fact that if ICANN says "ok, you get a TLD" I have little doubt the VC swine come closing in for the kill.
Hell, look at one of Esther's investments: agency.com. It was started with $80 and will do something on the order of millions if not billions this year.
There do indeed need to be finite limits on the number of TLDs, but they are extremely large numbers. Even our most ardent critics now state publically that it's well over 10,000.
Need Mercedes parts ?
I say - do away with DNS and the money-laundering greed-mongers - the whole system is pretty screwed up .. selling domain-names is like selling real estate on the moon! Let's come up with a better way to get from point A to point B ..
[btw - ever notice the eerie similarities between domain names (and now ML domain names) and the tower of Babel?]
----
.je .."
".. if they spoke the same language then nothing they attempted would be impossible for them
Oh baby I can taste it!
Blar.
From researching DNS I can tell you that there is absolutely no technical reason why we cannot add more TLDs. Hosting a root server is not difficult and it isn't a CPU intensive operation. It's more I/O bound than anything. Concerned about being able to support more queries? Consider the following:
The 20 something MILLION domains registered under .com are supported by only 11 TLD servers. (dig ns com). What does that tell you?
A simple Intel PC running Linux could easily do at least 3000 queries per second or so. The busiest root server gets 8000 at peak times.
Bind 8 supports up to 16,777,216 (2^24) zones (TLDs or SLDs are zones)
RAM is what's most important in a root DNS server. That's where you'll have to run named and store resource records and zone information structures in order to have fast response times
The only thing that might be needed out there are some more TLD servers, and those could be hosted by the companies that wish to hold the registries for a TLD (or TLDs). Alternative DNS solutions have existed for ages and are doing fine with lots of TLDS. There's no reason why we can't start making a move over to a more open and democratic solution like them. This new company Open DNS Technologies shows lots of promise. Actually works with email and through firewalls too.
We have to make a change to the naming system that's out there now. And keep in mind - the only thing that ICANN really has control over is the releasing of new TLDs onto the root servers. They have no jurisdiction over alternative DNS's.
It's about time we change things.
You are simply repeating the FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt - spread by those who want to block new TLDs.
There is absolutely no risk of "instability" by adding even hundreds of thousands of new TLDs. I've worked with someone who actually created a working root with somewhere on the order of 6,000,000 TLDs. (We essentially floated an old version of .com up one level.)
The "instability" that is feared is that the e-merchants won't be able to sell you the latest wizzo shoes 24x7x365. Seems to me that since it's the merchants who want this that they ought to ante up the $$ to pay for bomb-proof servers, mongo UPS systems, and other things that won't stop you from getting a 404 when somebody moves their content or an exchange congests or a routing black hole forms.
As for actual DNS failures - DNS is robust and won't keel over should some TLD operator futz up his/her zone file. In fact most folks didn't even notice when NSI lost .com for several hours the other month.
New TLDs are simply not a reason to go Chicken Little.
By-the-way, I am a happy user of .web in the IOD registry. I use the ORSC/Superroot DNS roots. I've got access to many TLDs beyond those in the ICANN/NTIA root. And there's not a trace of "instability".
So how often will (or can) ICANN meet and add new TLD's?
Once a week? Once a year? Never again?
Other people have already asked, but I'm also curious, is there a technical reason to limit TLD's or is it just plain' ol' politics?
I don't know about you, but I don't fancy typing .museum every 35 seconds... hell i can't even spell it right here. :)
mov ax, 13h
int 10h
mov ax, 13h
int 10h
As GC is would have to answer out of band names. If you're serious about running .hom and would like me to include it in the ORSC root send me the namesevers for that zone. I can arrange secondaries for you if you like
Just send me mail.
richard@a.root-servers.orsc
richard@the.web
richard@chrono.faq
richard@dns.news
richard@vrx.net
Need Mercedes parts ?
Noticably lacking are any TLD's reserved for criticism of large trademark holders -- i.e. the .sucks proposal that would have allowed legitimate criticism sites to avoid specious trademark infringement lawsuits (remember Verizonreallysucks.com?)
At least it has dawned upon the sage minds of ICANN that 3-4 TLD's constitutes an artificial scarcity. Perhaps today's decision opens the door for future domains that represent broader constituencies.
Sincerely,
Vergil
Insects and Grafitti Photos
According to this Wired article, the .pro TLD will require some sort of proof of "professional status". From the .pro ;ap plication:
"The initial rollout of doctors, lawyers and accountants will have a first and unfettered opportunity to register within the .pro domain. That opportunity will not be extended to the public at large, but will be limited to professionals who have been qualified to practice within their respective professions." I imagine it'll be strictly US-centric in there. .museum will be for "accredited" museums, and .name would have reserved second-level names (eg., doe.name) and register eg., john.doe.name. .museum?!? .aero?!? .coop?!? What the hell are those? Like all the freaking museums and aero-space companies, not to mention the co-ops of the world, are taking all the domain names! And .pro? Use a freaking phone book people! Like I'm going to go to johndoe.med.pro to find a Doctor for chrissakes! Only to find out he's in Cambodia!?! .com[mie]'s don't snatch it up (which they no doubt will). And .info will definitely be mined before it even gets released. See this quote:
.name is slightly useful, but I don't think anyone has my name on the .com, .org, .net, .etc TLD's. How about yours? .org or .net? You're almost guaranteeing a webstore a slow painful death if they don't have a .com name. And I don't think that .biz will solve that issue either. (And where the hell is .tech.pro or something similar?!?)
The
Of course, for what it's worth, I think it's all a bunch of crap.
.biz is a helpful addition, as long as the equivalent
"[.info will deal with IP issues by...] Instituting a Sunrise Period to allow qualifying trademark owners to pre-register their trademarks as domain names.
The real problem is the lame-ass IP policies and education, not the number of TLD's. How many people (not us geeks, mind you) know of, much less use
Barry Shein proposed this idea on the ENIAC mailing list about 1989. There is some merit to it. I've played around a bit and found BIND8 can handle all numeric domains with no problem but BIND4 pukes, so you need a letter in there somewhere.
There is an ancilliary idea that rides on top of this which addresses what I call the ".tel" problem, and that is do we really want a single point of control/failure for all telephone numbers under IP. If that single point has anything to do with the scoundrels at the ITU then no; run screaming into the night.
What might make sense is to divide telephone number domain up with 10,000 numeric tlds to distribute the load, control and responsabillity. For example my phone number is +1 (613) 473-1719 and if you (even for a moment) point your nameserver at 199.166.24.1 then you can type http://ph-1.613.473.1719 then you'll get to my home page. Obiously this would scale to be a billion domains under 10,000 tlds.
A few years ago this would be an unthinkable horror but with contemporaty technology it's a no brainer.
If your phone number ends in 1719 and you want a domnain like this send me mail to richard@vrx.net.
There is of course no charge.
Need Mercedes parts ?
The resolution states that ICANN is going to negotiate with the given set of seven organizations.
The implication is that each of those organizations will host a registry for all the names in the domain with the suffix they are assigned. Is that right? Will they be limited in how much will they may charge per registration in the registry? Will they be required to accept registrations from any registrar, or only the existing authorized few?
Who holds the registry of the registries mapping TLD's to registry locations? Every registry? I'd hate to have to hard-code all those new locations into every implementation of whois.
If .xxx existed several currently profitable filtering software companies - who I'm sure contribute to ICANN in any way possible - would lose a lot of money.
Can we say Collusion
Ad in classifieds: Pandora's Box (no box) $5
If you were at the ICANN meeting in LA or watched on ReadBadVideo you'd have noticed that the application was indeed for .air (so names like us.air, northwest.air etc could exist) but ONE ICANN board member said it was "too generic" (God forbid a Generic-Top-Level-Domain be "too generic") so the board decided it should be .aero.
Somehow US Air getting us.aero does't have quite the same cachet. If I was the TLD applicant that gave ICANN $50K to review the proposal which could have easily have cost 10X that much to write I think I'd be pretty annoyed.
Need Mercedes parts ?
It gets worse. I got some NSI spam within the past week or so offering a discount to people who register the corresponding .net and .org to go along with their .com.
I was actually looking forward to the new domains. I thought they would create some good ones that might be worth using. I find these new ones to be most illogical, however. Except for .biz and .pro, they are all over three letters! Judging from how unsuccessful .us has been due to its long extensions (see nic.us to see how long they are; domainname.city.state.us), you would think that they'd learn. What about .web? And how about .porn or .xxx, which would finally make it easy to create filters that didn't have large rates of misblocking pages while not blocking all pages that they are supposed to (see peacefire.org)? I could have done a better job than them and I'm just a teenager.
.com, .net, and .org. There is no way that creating extensions that only apply to a small percentage of people will work. We need to get rid of this appointed web authority.
The whole point of this was to get rid of the congestion that has overtaken
"I have not failed. I've simply found 10,000 ways that won't work." --Thomas Edison
Breaking the 3 letter barrier unleashes all sorts of problems and confusion
You mean like
Need Mercedes parts ?
richard@ns1.vrx.net Sat Nov 18 16:30:19 ~
% dig sux. ns
; <<>> DiG 8.1 <<>> sux. ns
;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
;; got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 3
;; QUERY SECTION:
;; sux, type = NS, class = IN
;; ANSWER SECTION:
sux. 2D IN NS ns1.jerky.net.
sux. 2D IN NS ns1.vrx.net.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns1.jerky.net. 1D IN A 204.57.55.100
ns1.vrx.net. 2D IN A 199.166.24.1
ns1.vrx.net. 2D IN A 216.13.76.2
;; Total query time: 2 msec
;; FROM: ns1.vrx.net to SERVER: default -- 199.166.24.1
;; WHEN: Sat Nov 18 16:30:26 2000
;; MSG SIZE sent: 21 rcvd: 118
Need Mercedes parts ?
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/scripts/rammaker.a
Need Mercedes parts ?
...ecstasy.mdma. :)
Somebody could get really creative with these...and not necessarily in a good way, although it would be kind of amusing to see shark.fin.-- or something (which is kind of how I feel about bankers, personally). What I would like to know is why more people don't do the same thing as our friend with the goat and do some really nasty things with existing country TLDs...I mean, .bs (Bahamas), .id (Indonesia) and .my (Malaysia)?! Names like that are just ripe for exploitation.
.cx is the TLD for Christmas Island. Where's Christmas Island? Your guess is as good as mine.
If you're wondering (and never bothered to look it up, unlike I who have to know for my job),
I'm not a geek, I'm just a clever script.
Much too little, much too late.
.org, .com, .net, .edu, are the well-known US
.mil, .int. The majority of the rest are
.nz for New Zealand.
.us domain, operationally it's not
.com, rather in the way UK
.com domains and others are crowded with all types of
.nz domain against that in .au where
.tv implied a location, after all very few .tv
.museum, .biz, .pro, .info, .aero, .name
.post, .tel, .travel, .union, .web, .xxx
.name alone, for who will be
.nz, Hamish.MacEwan.name.nz, or in France, to
.int. There they can do what they
The namespace (examples: www.name.com, www.entity.type.cc,
Hamish.MacEwan.gen.nz), which has at times attempted to by
its structure alone itself index and organise the content
on the internet, has been extended by the ICANN
organisation.
Whether these extensions will address the alledged problems
with the current architecture, is one great conjecture.
The internet name space has had only few and relatively
coarse categories,
centric Top-Level Domains (TLDs), though there are others
less well known,
ccTLDs, country top-level domains, like
While there is a
appealing and so the big four were used in preference and
have a defacto, though now diluted, US-orgin status... Fair
enough the Americans should claim
stamps bear no country of origin, they invented it, and it's
a easier privilege to grant and bear than patent or
copyright... right?
So the
business, entities, individuals, religions and this lack of
organisation is the price we pay for the rapid deployment of
the Internet services we now depend on. There is no Dewey
System for Internet, though why no one has mapped it onto
the Net (I await correction on this) I have no idea.
The organisation of the net into hierarchies, taxonomies,
rings and other structures has been performed by other
servers on the Net. Search engines, characterised by Yahoo,
which after all is an acronym for Yet Another Hierarchically
Organised Oracle.
Thus there was never a need for the namespace to be
particularly arranged, so we didn't need to wait years for
the structure to be decided, (and look how long it has taken
ICANN, and how much money, to decide on even recommending
seven categories for further negotiation), or pay for some
bureaucrat to tell us what category they decided we were in.
Compare growth in the
they have much stricter rules governing their category of the
namespace. Perhaps in a geographic and national context
such as the ccTLDs this is forgiveable, but it certainly is
not universal. The country code TLD was an easy way
to delegate responsbility, it should never have adopted the
notion that
domains have any relationship with Tuvalu beyond paying
them $US50 for a couple of years rental on the name.
And it's rewarding, find some figures on income for
countries from domain rental.
But how can you be asked to pay for what is after all only a
name? There is probably some cost, but it would be
microscopic, certain incrementally it is, but we have a long
history of renting or paying for concepts that have little
physical analogy.
After all, direct dial number from the telephone company are
only seven or eight digit numbers, and people pay extra for
them, atop the rental for the line. Stories are after all
only extensive original arrangements of words from the free
pool of language, and we pay for that.
However, after long and painful gestation and the input of
very very many cooks the broth was served and tasted by an
unelected minority of the users of the system, and a
selection of seven denominated as candidates for ascension
to TLD-hood.
What were they, what new categories were chosen to improve
the problems of the internet name space.
.coop,
If I need to explain what these extensions mean, doesn't
that immediately suggest ICANN have not simplified the
categorisation of internet names by these new extensions to
the namespace?
My reference for this is at Slashdot, and they reference and
I recommend both the C|Net article and the satire.
If I had told you the new TLDs included:
.kids,
I don't think it would be difficult to explain the probable
contents of those new domains in the namespace.
These domains were proposed and dismissed by ICANN in favour
of the first group.
They would have been categories that are relatively clear by
comparison with those anointed by ICANN, but like all
judgements subject to dispute.
Yes, there is a Roman alphabet bias, and an English language
bias, if there is to be language related domains, to which I
don't object, let's have them relative to either the
geographic area they apply to, yes each of them if there are
more than one, and an international domain, ie, maori.nz,
francaise.fr, esperanto.int.
But the point about the TLDs is that they must be
universally understood, thus their number should be limited,
so the more detailed categories can be defined locally in
the local tongue with the local alphabet.
We've done international categorisation quite well before
with the telephone network, it's namespace of course
contained only numbers, which is so much less contraversial,
due of course to it's total lack of meaning to be
misunderstood or offended at... though I recognize 13 is a
concern to some.
No-one would ever try to guess the telephone number of any
thing by knowing it's business type, and name. Guessing the
URL though, seems to be one of the goals of the new TLDs.
ICANN has been much reviled and accused, and it probably had
a chance to redeem itself with this, the most visible and
perhaps important (to them at least, though as I say, search
engines and classification sites will remain essential)
decision and output.
The belated too-little and too-late TLDs ICANN have chosen
will do nothing to improve the structure or utility of the
namespace, it will however for the chosen operators, be a
license, as a license to operate a TV station used to be, a
license to print money.
Thus, in a namespace of some importance to the planet, we
have been given seven new continents to develop and
discover.
Entry to these new lands is controlled by an organisation
that has been decried as secretive, arrogant and
slow-moving, and its selection of new TLDs only makes those
accusations more credible.
We will now no doubt be inundated with call to populate
these new spaces, from what I can see, the demand will be
small, but the necessity for some may be high. I expect
much contraversy, in
Hamish.MacEwan.name? Probably if the outcomes of ICANN's
Universal Dispute Resolution Process are anything to go by,
the richest or most famous Hamish MacEwan. Not me I fear.
Perhaps a geographic distinction will be established,
Hamish.MacEwan.nz.name, but then why couldn't that have been
left to
nom.fr?
Thus I can only conclude, the rush for TLDs is nothing but a
mercenary land grab. It is being cynically managed by
several organisations for their benefit, WIPO, WTO, and ICANN
appear to be acting in concert, with ICANN granting licenses
to print money by attempting to simultaneously extend, and
preserve the scarcity and hence value, of domain names.
If there's only one Business.com, you might pay US$7.5
million for it, but if it's merely one of many Business.????
domains, who cares?
As I see it, that's what's happened, and why. Mercifully, I
think it probably will turn out irrelevant, and those
operators of the new domains will find themselves as out of
pocket as the Telephone companies who tried to buy back their
lost wired monopolies in the recent round of 3G mobile
frequency auctions, but that's another story.
I'd suggest we freeze any further TLDs, and instead confine
ICANN, and the other international organisations to mucking
around in their own TLD,
wish without wasting and constraining the rest of us. If
they do finally come up with something useful, they can
compete like the other namespace companies.
They are adding TLD's... so what. is my dns server going to all of a sudden explode because of it? no.
.fart as a TLD.
All of this is nothing more than marketing and power positioning. the impending doom of no more ip addresses is more important than some marketing droid wanting
People keep trying to make it out that the improper choices in TLD's will crash the net or cause a huge problem.... this is pure Bullpucky.
make tld's open. I could care less. my dns will still work and the net really wont get any more screwed then it is now.
If they are truely concerned with it then start by revoking all domains regestered to squatters. (freshmeat.org for example! although I prefer fresh.meat but what the hey.)
it isnt that important to have a conference about, and we shouldnt care what kind of free money these rich bastards are getting. (TLD's should be the property of noone. but this will never be the case.)
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Last week during the ICANN annual meeting in Los Angeles, little known ORSC made huge inroads into the core of the ICANN Monopoly. Representatives of The Open Root Server Confederation were on hand converting and convincing hundreds of key ICANN attendees that the ICANN Legacy Root's days were numbered. Immediately following the meeting, many influencial organizations and individuals - including at least one ICANN board member - switched to one of the ORSC affiliated root zones, which provide for an inclusive name space of considerably more than just the usual com/net/org Intenet that most users have been led to believe they were limited to. Top-Level Domains (TLDs) such as .BIZ, .WOMEN, .LIST, .CHILDREN and .NEWS count for only a few of
the litterally dozens available in the ORSC Inclusive Name Space that has existed since long before ICANN. Dr. Vint Cerf, challenged other board members and stymied attempts to
award .WEB to an ICANN applicant because Image Online Design Inc. had, "An Operational Registry" resolved by the ORSC Root system. Although the board agreed to further
negotiations with ICANN applicant JVTeam with regards to admitting .BIZ into their Legacy root, it is unlikely that such an event could occur given the fact that the Atlantic Root Network Inc.
has contracted an "operational commercial registry" to accept registrations for the five year old domain. Information on ORSC can be found at http://www.open-rsc.org while registration information for .BIZ is available at
http://www.biztld.net. Dozens of other domains can be registered at The PacificRoot's commercial Registry located at http://www.PacificRoot.com
So foul a sky clears not without a storm - Shakespeare -
This seems to be the opinion of EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO SEES IT!!! Watch as several million people make a weird face and say, "What???!!"
I suggest we (no, I don't know who 'we' is) shitcan this stupidity and start over. This is seven steps backward.
I personally own several novelty domain names and I wouldn't mind owning more just for the fun factor. But none of these are even interesting.
And I suppose I'm going to have to race to get jon.sullivan.name even though it looks retarded. If I don't grab it ASAP I'll lose out to one of the other 10,000 Jon Sullivans out their. Great solution. This really helps.
New headline "ICANN takes a dump on common sense."
Jon Sullivan
Jon Sullivan
www.jonsullivan.com
People will continue to register each site under every TLD they can get their hands on. Government will continue to award sites based on trademark. Same old mess, some new scrambling for all the "sure-fire winner" names among the brokers.
What I want to know is, why bother with TLDs at all? Why not just arbitrary strings, with spaces and punctuation?
--------
Theoretically you are correct. But, if aol AOL approaches the .pro people with even a one sixteenth-assed reason for having the aol.pro name given to AOL (which isn't hard...a site dedicated to "AOL professionals"), they will get aol.pro. Even if you got it first and your initials are A. O. L. AOL will still get it since they can sue you and your registrar into poverty. Even with the museum thing, AOL will just sponsor a museum someplace, and add aol.museum. They can buy a fleet of corporate jets (if they don't already have them) and then they "need" aol.aero. And then there's aol.coop. I guess that could be the email server for all the programmers they keep cooped up in Herndon 24/7?
;)
Considering ICANN is run by big business for big business, who do you think will have the final say in how these names are REALLY going to be handed out?
I actually don't care much either way since I registered my last name, and my "online name" already, so I'm set.
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!
You're missing the point. The point is to standardise so that you can go to _any_ place and visit https://whos.here./ and you'll get a list of people registered with that place. Same for https://whats.here/
.here has already been booked. I've already suggested an alternative TLD, but IMO .here would have been so much more intuitive to use :(.
.tld. for that purpose. Then we can stick to the usual Internet style stuff.
And yeah I know
Another approach would probably be to come up with a totally new protocol/method to refer to devices in the same physical context you are in. But I'm saying there's no need if we standardise on a
A tld is not absolutely necessary, but if you have one it reduces the chances of clashes when people/devices have names that are like existing TLDs.
Cheerio,
Link.
No no no ... we need all the lawyers to decide who gets to be the next US president. Then they can go off to do all these piddly things! ;-)
Believe it or not, my sister actually has network access in her chicken coop, so there would be at least one location that would qualify. Actually, half of the building is a small office and the other half is a chicken coop (don't ask) but it's kind of fun to say that in Seattle even chickens can surf the web.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
(a quote)
"The group had considered
Tyranny of the minority, anyone?
Oh well.
not last time I checked..
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
saymy.name and
chicken.coop
Created in the mid-1990s, indeed. Try a little fact-checking next time. (I personally remember using sites such as "ftp.sun.com" and "uunet.uu.net" in 1987.)
Deven
"Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay
ICANN had a chance to organize the web in an intuitive way, and we get these?!? I really feel that ICANN has screwed us all over. The Usenet naming system has evolved over the years into something that is easily understood (although sometimes abused) and information can be easily found. The Usenet style .comp, .rec, .soc, .sci and .alt allow the user to easily find the information that they seek.
I guess what it really boils down to is a company (RegistryPro) actually has the vision, but knowing that they only have a chance at *one* TLD, have decided to have them all as sub-domains of .pro...
But couldn't they have picked something better???
Who else here feels that this system should be totally redesigned from the ground up? An easy, flexible system.
slashdot.news.comp
It's never too late...
You may wonder, why is there .museum and .aero but nothing like .xxx, .comp, or .movie?
.aero and .museum gTLD's met the criteria
.xxx and .movie had a sound
.com, .net, .org, .gov, .int, .mil, .edu.
.biz
.pro
.med.pro - Medicine and Healthcare
.law.pro - Legal and Judicial System
.agr.pro - Agriculture
.ins.pro - Insurance
.fin.pro - Finance
.aer.pro - Aerospace
.rx.pro - Pharmaceutical
.trv.pro - Travel & Leisure
.art.pro - Arts, Entertainment, Recreation
.pub.pro - Publication
.auto.pro - Automotive
.npo.pro - Nonprofit
.acct.pro - Accounting
.trans.pro - Transportation
.util.pro - Utilities
.coop
.museum
.info
.com, .net and .org
.name
.biz, for personal non-commercial use.
.aero
Basically it boils down to the proposals for the
that was laid out by ICANN. If the companies that proposed
business plan and the technical and administrative skills that ICANN felt that would be
needed by a gTLD registry, then they might have been accepted. The US Department of
Commerce gave ICANN the task of administering the process of getting 7 new gTLD's out
there for use. The 7 gTLD's that ICANN set forth still need to be accepted by the
US Department of Commerce, but that is supposed to be just a rubber stamp formality.
gTLD = Global Top Level Domain. Right now other then the two letter country gTLD's there
are
ICANN = Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (http://www.icann.org)
tld :
registar : Neulevel (joint venture by NeuStar and Melbourne IT)
info url : http://www.neustar.com/features/icann/index.html
restrictions: for businesses for commercial uses only and not for personal use
old :
register : Registry pro (by Register.com, Inc. and Virtual Internet pac)
info url : http://www.registrypro.com
restrictions: For licensed or accredited professionals. There will be second level domains
for the following.
doctors, hospitals, HMOs, medical supply companies
lawyers, judges, courts and courthouses, law firms, clerks
farmers, food processors, distributors
brokers, agents, insurance firms, actuaries
funds, investment banks, brokerages, lenders, banks, accountants
engineers, manufacturers, airports, airlines
pharmacies, pharmaceutical companies, laboratories, drugstores
hotels, restaurants, travel agents, resorts, airlines, car rentals
cinemas, theaters, symphonies, museums, actors, venues, operas
publishers, authors, printers, writers, editors, photographers
manufacturers, subcontractors, dealerships, parts, mechanics
charities, missions, trade associations, unions
CPAs, auditors, tax preparers, accountants, bookkeepers
trucking, delivery services, railroads, shipping, carting
power companies, phone companies, energy, oil, cable, gas
tld :
registar : National Cooperative Business Association
info url : http://www.ncba.org/ccoop.cfm
restrictions: Only available to business's and enterprises that operate according to
co-operative principles.
tld :
registar : Museum Domain Management Association
(sub group of International Council of Museums)
info url : http://www.icom.org/
restrictions: Only accredited museums worldwide
tld :
registar : Afilias, which is a joint venture by the following:
1stDomain.Net
Corporate Domains Inc.
Domain Bank, Inc.
DomainInfo AB
DomainPeople, Inc.
Domain Registration Services
Enter-Price Multimedia AG (EPAG)
Internet Council of Registrars (CORE)
InterQ, Inc.
NameSecure.com, Inc.
Netnames International Ltd.
Network Solutions, Inc.
Polar Software Ltd.
Procurement Services International (Japan), Inc.
Register.com, Inc.
Schlund + Partner AG
SiteName
Speednames, Inc.
Tucows, Inc.
info url : http://www.afilias.com/
restrictions: Pretty much none, will most likely be as open as
tld :
registar : Global.Name registry
info url : http://theglobalname.org/
restrictions: the opposite of
tld :
registar : Societi Internationale de Tilicommunications Aironautiques
info url : http://www.sita.int/
restrictions: for companies, bodies and organizations participating in air transport worldwide
But no .asdf?
What? I want my .asdf
Believe with me, my saplings.
.museum???
:(
.name are good (although I would have preferred .home as a "personal" domain, many people would think home=homepage)
.com clone
;)
.aero - there are thousands of industries with more need for their own domain name than these two.. can't museums, libraries, schools go into .edu?
.air for wireless networks (aero reminded me of that one)
.xxx of course
.aero.ind, .med.ind, .food.ind, etc underneath it?
of all the TLDs...
I know we like to whinge and complain that the proposed (now confirmed) TLDs are stupid, and they miss out ones that are obviously needed - how about we have a poll of about 50 TLDs and just get a yes/no on each one - then we get a % support for them..
Of course it won't make a shit of difference to ICANN
For the record:
.info and
.biz - another
.web - isn't that what the www. at the start is for?
.pro - is for professionals I believe, but will the porn industry make use of it?
.museum,
Ones that WOULD have been good:
*maybe*
.kids and
.med for hospitals, doctors, possibly? Or perhaps a whole TLD for "industry" (.ind) with
Additional Idea #1: Scrap it and go with the newsgroup heirachy
Additional Idea #2: Make people use the correct TLD (com = company, org = organisation etc)
Well, thats my ramblings for the day...
- Chuq
TLDs like:
.perv - Most of the net falls under this one...
.orgy - For those special clustering solutions
.dot - For those who still have ham radio licences.
.dash - For the rest of the Morse Code freaks
.netnazi - For all those people who want to act like the French government.
.post - So I can get "first.post".
"Trademarks are the heraldry of the new feudalism."
I got dibs on wax.museum!
To bad I work in the IT/Technical field. I guess I'll just have to find a new line of work.
Nate
THIS SPACE FOR RENT
Any attempt to add just a few more TLDs to the system is going to result in redundancy: why bother with restricted TLDs at all? At the moment, it only means that if you want to look at a site (say 'slashdot' or 'freshmeat') you have to remember which arbitrary suffix to put on the end: there is no sensible distinction between .com, .net or .org - they might as well just be .1, .2 and .3.
.COM domains. (Of course people can still opt to go to ORSC instead of ICANN for a TLDs).
Completely opening the system up for people to register their own top-level names will make the world a much simpler place. Isn't 'http://slashdot/' much simpler?
People can still create hierarchical names, so if someone wanted to create a '.church' TLD and give away second level domains to worthy causes, they are welcome to. ICANN could sell TLDs for much more than
-- Andrem
There has been a major scientific break-in
Personally I was hoping they would approve my favorite one: the .not
Just think of the potential uses (and abuses) of this one!
Just say no. Sigs are bad for your health.
I think what this issue boils down to is who will control how domain namespace is organized. When this all started up, the US Government controlled it. That was great for the times. We were on a small scale, it provided needed stability and standardization. Then Uncle Sam got out of the Internet business and for a long time things sort of drifted along on their own momentum. But massive growth has led us to a situation where everyone has the same great idea for a catchy name, only to find out that someone beat them to it. Or even more sinister, you get people who decide to take over a domain name and hold it hostage for the highest bidder.
.museum? .pro? smith.name? Yeah, it's not alt.sex.stories.hermaphrodite, but it's a big step in that direction. I forgot who said it, but someone quipped about how to explain all this to their grandma. It's a good observation about how complex and confused the namespace will get now. In the past, you could basically count on www.whatever.com, it's been a no-brainer. But if these new TLDs take off, where's the consistency? People can't read a simple presidential ballot, c'mon!
.xxx and .kid or whatever should be created because they're the right design choice, not because of the politics invovled.
I read through most of the threads on this topic. Some were insightful, some were just whining. But I think there are some points to be considered:
1- Breaking the 3 letter barrier unleashes all sorts of problems and confusion. Some people mentioned we should move toward the USENET naming conventions -- what do you think ICANN's list of TLDs signifies?
2- ICANN, for all its many faults, made a smart move in picking entities that will (should) be able to handle the effort at establishing a TLD, but the fact that so many better options were left out, simply because no one 'reliable' signed on for it is a loss. In addition, as some people here have already shown, these new TLDs will not necessarily be used an they were originally envisioned. And what's to stop someone from monopolizing the new namespace? Amazon.biz, show.biz? You'll run into the same issues.
3- I think serious thought needs to be put into, as several people have already suggested, developing a distributed naming system -- or even better, replacing DNS with something completely different. I admit that I'm at a loss for suitable replacements or where to even start. But I think that it's pretty obvious that the larger something grows, the more impossible it is to maintain centralized control. The fact that ICANN based design decisions on who could provide the service is fundamentally flawed.
Finally, ICANN is basically a pointless beauracracy. I'm American, and I resent the fact that this essentially American organization is telling the world how it is. The Net should decide what is, and is not appropriate -- not someone or some group who thinks they know best.
sorry it's so long...
Is it me, or are these new TLDs incredibly useless? What problems will these solve? What kind of crack was ICANN smoking when they decided to use these silly things instead of useful nominations?
I guess if you have enough dough, you can persuade the money monkeys of ICANN to do anything...
I agree with ketilf. They're going to get huge amounts of flak whatever they do, and they're much better off starting with lame names that nobody cares about too much so they can fight their fights on those. They only get one chance to introduce .inc, .mp3, and .xxx, and they need a couple of practice rounds first.
.biz, since various Alternate Root groups have been using that for a while.
The main controversial one is
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
According to the AP story, .web was not accepted because of "concerns that it has already been unofficially registered."
ehhhh?
__
>"You're not an Internet provider? Sorry, you can't have .net.
That damned 'making a profit' thing getting in the way of logic and ideals, again.
Seriously, what real business incentive would NSI have for enforcing TLD guidelines?
>Instead, we get crap like "Register your domain in ALL these different TLD's so nobody can steal it!"
Wow, they really messed up, huh? Instead of having the overhead of reviewing and rejecting applicants that don't qualify for a particular TLD, they simply get 3x the revenue from many customers.
Seriously (again), I agree from a logical POV that we'd be better off (the users of the internet, that is) had NSI been required to strictly enforce the distinctions between com, org and net - but it's unrealistic to criticize them for having not done so seeing as how their reason for existance is to make a profit (maximize revenue, control costs, generate a return for investors, etc).
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
My monkey-brain powered arm could have picked better TLDs!
-gerbik
Are these guys ON MDMA or what? No, they couldn't be, because I've never done anything this stupid under the influence of any drug (well, maybe alcohol). For the most part, these TLD's really suck ass. What is .biz that .com isn't? .info is kind of implied since the Internet is the "Information Superhighway", .pro just doesn't seem to make any sense at all, .museum seems just a little bit too granular (why not .theatre or .lib?), .aero seems even more narrow, and how does .coop satisfy anything that isn't covered by .org? Of course, I would be interested in chicken.coop, but there's not chance that I'll be able to get a dictionary word unless I register in the first five seconds. What a bunch of crap.
ICANN == "I can't!";
(end comment) */ }
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Basically I want a TLD for referring to devices that are close by. So that I can enter a room and see what's in it by going to https://whats.here/ or who- https://whos.here/. Toggle the lights - https://lights.here/toggleonoff . Talk to people: imsg://johndoe.here/?Yo!Dude!
l dhere-01.txt
I've talked to the ICANN (but nothin is happening so far) and now I'm trying to get the IETF interested:
ftp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-yeoh-t
Cheerio,
Link.
I don't see why everybody is so upset with .web missing...what's wrong with what already exists--.net?
Heh, MDMA, the first thing that came to mind...shows where my priorities are.
Well..it's now official...the internet is yet another place where comercialism rules. Is this new? No. But the realisation is.
.biz and such it's pure unedited comercialism. Marketing Drones around the globe are masturbating at the slightest thought of using these new TLD's to thier company's or client's atvantage to push more shit into the MTv ridden minds of teenybopers everywhere.
.lame TLD and then give *.is.lame away for free to the lame company's of this world. (and if someone does this, i want a 10% kick back on any revenues for my Intellectual Property :)
:)
:) (check out my flame-proof jacket baby)
You see, it wasn't so bad before...but now we have TLD's like
It's sad really, like i had said before (here) these 4 character TLD's go against the grain (and are lame anyways), i like the current (now obsolete) 3 character limit (some instaces 4 is acceptable, but on the proposed list it was insane!), it kept the shit simple...(Keep It Simple Stupid).
Yah wanna know what's more scary? all these company's that got these TLD's are suped-up fly-by-nighter's that promised some MS Millionaire 10x his weight in gold for some Capital...at least NSI didn't start off charging for domains...but then as with anything they became stoopid by thier own demise.
Well, I think i'll go propose to ICANN the
someone shoot me before it gets lamer....
but wait!! my favorite! www.linux.is.lame, to be able to give out that address to someone when they wanted to see the linux page would bring me to golconda for sure...off to ICANN it is...
NO SPORK
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
I agree. For instance, how many websites .aero are there going to be, even if it includes the aerospace and the commercial airlines? Is it really worth the effort of porting existing apps to recognize domains like this.
.coop and .pro? .web at least make a lot of sense as, in my opinion .health or .sex or .xxx, even .kids
And what's up with
It also would be interesting for non-admins like me to know what would it take to have an unlimited gTLDs. I'm surprised the registrars didn't came up with that idea as there would be a whole lot of money involved in selling any kind of domain name, people would go nuts buying all sorts of combinations. Not that that would be a good thing but it would surely be interesting to watch.
"All the things one has forgotten scream for help in dreams". Elias Canetti
Yes, IMHO, this many new TLDs are needed. .com got "mined out" in about 3 or 3.5 years. These new namespaces could, conceivably, get mined (if no additions) out in 10 years, if no extras are added.
.web should, of course, be at the top of the list for additions! 8)
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
Real life often require moving conservatively on issues which could have a major impact, and it is a tried and true engineering technique.
Hopefully in a year from ICANN will aprove a few dozen more domains based on the experience from things such as .museum.
If I could only get my hands on chicken.coop. :)
To add these domaing name is a good step gives apeople a little more freedom to choose. It is a big iWorld out there and now there. These name will help the iWorld have a bit more diversity.
If we refuse to be flexible, we are in effect opting out of the game of life. The world moves on without us.
I just hope I can be the first person to try to get the chicken.coop domain name. WOOHOO!
Mas vale cholo, que mal acompañado.
If the introduction of new TLDs works this time, maybe your favourite TLD will be introduced next time, and maybe from then on, TLDs will be introduced more often.
Also, someone asked why there has to be limits on TLDs, and not an infinite number. This is because you have to have the root-servers on the internet where a name lookup can start if you are looking up a name, and the way DNS works is to cache lookups around the net, since it is hierarchical, thus alleviating the root-servers' workload. The stability of the root-servers are actually essential to the stability of the internet as it is used today.
These new ones could get "mined out" a helluva lot sooner as soon as Network Solutions starts sending out spam E-mails inviting you to register your ".com" address in all of these new ones for the low low price of $29.95. They've already done something like this for .net and .org. Don't think that today's ICANN announcement fixes any problems when you've got clueless weasels like NetSOL around.
is that people are stupid, or so arrogant that they feel they can ignore established net.custom. If Network Solutions wasn't so stupid they don't know which side of the TV to watch, they would have been enforcing the RFC right from the get-go. "You're not an Internet provider? Sorry, you can't have .net. You're not a non-profit organization or individual? Sorry, you can't have .org." Instead, we get crap like "Register your domain in ALL these different TLD's so nobody can steal it!"
Fuck Slashdot
Is there any reason, apart from the difficulty of establishing a pervasive presence, why an alternative to the current DNS system couldn't be produced?
.com, .co, .org etc at the moment purely because BIND is hardcoded to only use the ICANN's root servers?
i.e is the reason we only have
I know there are organisations like AlterNIC.. why have these services not gained more use?
I'm probably just clueless about how DNS works at a global level, but it seems to me, since BIND is so widely used, that it could be easily modified, or a BIND clone produced, to provide a multitude of TLDs...
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
In my opinion, .name and .biz are the most attractive TLDs on the list allowed, but that doesn't mean I'm right, and that doesn't mean the other TLDs are useless/stupid/whatever. This is pretty well thought through.
I have to admit that I was a little bit moved, not excited, just moved, when I saw that IANA had approved the news TLDs, especially .name. I had looked in the past to try and get a domain name for geneology with my last name .org, .com, and .net but they had already been taken. Upon reading further I found out that only one company would be offering the new TLDs. I guess I have been a little bit out of the loop because I had no idea that only one company would be able to sell the new TLDs. I guess now it makes sense why I saw some articles referring to the bids made to IANA, I guess I just didn't think much about it. Since their is no competition, many of these domain names probably won't be sold for nothing less than your own weight in gold. Maybe not .name, but I'm sure that coca-cola.biz is going to cost more than $35.
And I know that all of the hard-core anti-porn crusaders would agree with me on this, too -- I look forward to the day when viewing evil, bad, rotten sites is difficult, in exactly the same way listening to evil, bad, rotten songs, or watching evil, bad, rotten movies is getting difficult up here in Fargo, ND.
You just have to go up to Hollywood Videos just north of Northport Hornbacher's. Or hell, go to ABCX. Or even take a good look at some of the anime flicks from Blockbuster.
For all of the people in the world who dont live in Fargo (Ha. Doesn't everyone live in Fargo?), even Democrats in North Dakota are Republicans. Here, being a liberal means that you don't desecrate the graves of the people who have abortions. If the "internet" made some way of keeping children from viewing any independant thoughts or any ideas that might be construed as "forward" or "modern", then I know for sure that 80% of all North Dakotans would whole-heartedly support it.
Hopefully everyone caught the sarcasm. But the reality is so much more funny.
The good news: I only have 5 more months of this.
Oh. And here is your proof. There are actually computers in North Dakota.
Edith Keeler Must Die
Anyone else think that making the TLD's have many different lengths is a bad thing? I can just see everybody who types in yyy.museum putting in yyy.museum.com instead. That wouldn't happen nearly as much if they kept the TLD's to three or four characters.
If you are modding me down because you disagree with me, use the "Flamebait" category, not the "Troll" one.
It is a relief to see that some of the winning registrars (.coop for instance) will be enforcing registration requirements. The relaxing of regulations for .com, .net, etc. created the mess that we have now: registering all three to protect your name, registering a .org when you aren't really a not-for-profit, etc... Sorry folks, nobody will get to be the proud owner of "chicken.coop"...
Take a look at the applications submitted by the winning registrars.
Of course, there is the little matter of how nice guys that don't copyright names could have trouble with infringement...
And these great "minds" spent all this time and energy on this? What a bunch of boobs! B-double-O-B's!
Let me moderate them one by one:
.biz
Score 1, Redundant
A dot-com wannabe? What does this entail, other than having the people that already own dot-com trying to sue for the dot-biz? .info
Score -1, Redundant
Hmm, i wonder what this one if for? Any use i can think of for this one can be better served by info.domain.something... .name
Score -1, Silly
This is probably the worse option for "personal" domains i can think of. Let alone sorting problems with two people having the same name (who gets the domain? the oldest?), i don't really think this is going to be very popular. I wouldn't want one, would you? IMHO they should have gone for .home, .ind (for individual, or independent, or whatever you want it to mean) or something of the kind. .pro
Score 4, Interesting
This looks like it can actually be used to some effect. Of course, if it's targeted at professionals of some sort, i wonder if it is going to achieve its objectives. I see a lot of www.windows.pro domains popping up for magazines, companies, and so on. But that's probably what they want anyway, to sell domain names, right? Being useful to people is for sissies... .museum
Score -1, Troll
dot-what? Is anyone here in their right minds? How many of those are there going to be? 100? 200? 5000? What's next? dot-church? Too limited, too long, too hard to remember if there are only going to be a few of them. .aero
Score -1, Redundant
Too limited. Too self-serving. Too redundant. Except if it's meant as a domain for airheads... .coop
Score 2, Interesting
This one could be interesting, but isn't this covered by .com or .org already? It could prove limited in usage.
In general, the new domains are either redundant or too limited in usage. The criteria for appraisal of the proposals were not, in my oppinion, in the best interest of the Internet Community. ICANN could have started off a whole lot better.I always knew I was going to miss Jon Postel, i just didn't know I was going to miss him this much.
free the mallocs!
that joke doesn't work 'cause it would be ecstasy.museum
Well, slap my ass and call me redundant, but I agree-- these are boring and not terribly useful. Shying away from the controversy that might be caused by practical suffixes, they picked a bunch of innocuous, useless suffixes. Who the hell is going to use .name, and for what? .aero!? Yeah, sign me up.
.dot, .sucks, and .beer.
Of course, the ridiculous things that will come out of this will be the lawsuits. Someone guy named Donald will register Donald.name, and McDonald's will sue him for trademark infringment, and on and on and on.
At least the pointlessness of these new suffixes gives hope to other potential names like
I thought of a system where everyone hosts their own domain. There is no need for any central server, no paying to register, and no need for TLDs. It would work using IP Multicasting, Good Cryto, and other fun things. Email me at nemo@nemo-server.net if you are interested.
Given the length of time over which IODesign has been passing these out, I'd expect that they'd have a reasonable chance of winning in a case, and that would pretty much gut ICANN, government mandate or no. Their site has a link to an interesting article by Brock Meeks that's been linked to before in an older thread; apparently NSI (through a cutout) also wants .web.
-- fencepost
fencepost
just a little off
There are a few related ones like MDA (which has an amine instead of a methylamine), and MDE (which has ethylamine), and while both are psychoactive compounds, neither has the particular effects that make ecstasy so famous.
.www?
- .kids [and]
.tel ... seemed too ambiguous.
Yeah, what's to stop me from putting up a website with the URL:http://sex.with.kids
http://promise.not.to.tel
Nothing can stop me. I'm evil.
I wonder what kind of Intellectual Property laws whales live under. If I were a whale, would I be violating whale copyright law by sinking a ship captained by a one-legged maniac?
That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
What about a .dot TLD? I always wanted to be dot.dot@dot.dot
If you read the application, the second level will be
So it is really more like a Usenet-style name system. Ex: ford.auto.pro, citibank.fin.pro, northwest.aero.pro, etc.
http://world.wide.web
Beautiful.....
"I can only show you Linux... you're the one who has to read the man pages."
ICANN seems to be drifting, rudderless (from so many conflicting agendas, i.e., corporate arm-twisting, academic waffling, etc.) into the rocks on a lee shore. This ain't no way to run a world, folks. They need to either find some principles, and the backbone to make them stick, or... admit failure (declare victory?) and get out of the business.
.com _must_ be a _legitimate_ registered business, an .edu _must_ be an established and _accredited_ educational institution, etc.); (2) each domain must be the _only_ domain owned by a specific business or other entity (no fair buying up everything that's similar, no registering multiple identities); (3) speculative domain-registration should be outlawed (establish a business legally, _then_ register the domain-name); (4) establish rules (with teeth!) to suppress trademark, brand-name, and typo-squatting abuses.
What's needed? Well, a few things - or so, at least, it seems to me: (1) Strict rules about who can register a domain-name in a particular TLD space (e.g., a
If ICANN doesn't get its act together in these areas, moves towards national legislation and interminable negotiations about international agreements (worse messes) will be inevitable. ICANN needs to be drafting proposed legislation in all venues, worldwide, to define the Internet naming conventions, procedures, rules, and remedies.
And, they failed to create a new adult oriented TLD (which would be ENORMOUSLY useful to both the porn mongers and the concerned parents of the world).
Hmmm, let me see how hard this is:
Any of these is better than most of the crap coughed up by ICANN.
ICANN is an excellent example of what happens when you combine huge committees, lawyers, big business, and good ol' fashioned bureaucracy into one big lovable ball of everything that tries to kill off inventiveness, efficiency, common sense, personal independance, and the human spirit.
Wow - a TLD just for those minty chocolate bars with the bubbles in them!
---
Monochrome - Probably the UK's largest internet BBS
One of the large Linux companies should consider setting up a Linux DNS, with instructions on how to access it. Then every Linux-related project wouldn't have to register linuxvideo.com, etc. and shovel yet more money to NSI. Instead, they'd register video.linux with VA, and there's no conflict with the TLDs as even proposed by ICANN.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Nothing has been solved, pretty much. Name crowding will still happen. Hopefully the 5 new board members, NOW that they have power, might push for a faster review of newer TLDs before the next scheduled time. We'll still have squatters and RDNH occuring as there's nothing desirable in these.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
It seems to me like they are overspecifying the use of some domains and underspecifying the use of others. .kids is a broad domain that allows many uses, but has a contraint on it. .biz doesn't. .biz will become a cleaner .com, but so what? All it would do is prevent trademark disputes. Secondly, what will happen to sites like buy.com? If they have a trademark on buy.com, then I can register buy.biz no problem, and that will be very confusing. On the other hand, they can't have a trademark on buy, so we end up with confusion. We will get an exact copy of .com, except without personal websites. But what's to say I'm not a buisness? I've done website design for people.
The only ones I can see working are .coop and .museum. All the rest are very shortsighted and simply not thought-out. Woe for the smart and useful domains like .kids.