Slashdot Mirror
.us Domains Coming in 2002
marnanel writes "Perhaps it had to happen eventually: the .us top-level domain has been transferred to a private company, NeuStar. One of the most interesting effects of this is that second-level domains, such as foo.us, will be available for the first time, instead of the existing hierarchical county.state.us system." But not until mid 2002.
Finally, I can get just.try.to.slashdot.us
I really want "http://all.your.base.are.belong.to.us" as my HP :)))))
I personally never agreed with a "commercial" root dn. However, times have changed, and the commercial net is here to stay.
Now I can watch companies sue everyone in sight over ownership of .us domains, too! Whee!
.us domains right away. May I pet your Ferraris?
On the upside for NeuStar, they are sure to make a fortune from all the companies sick of getting into lawsuits over this sort of thing and buy thier
spam.us
or
sue.us
they can screw up .biz and .info ...
.us is just more gas for the fire
1.2.3.us
Mmmmmmm. Floor pie!
It'd be nice to start a non-profit company, register .org.us, and let other non-profit organizations register domains on it really cheap.
What will happen to these TLDs: .EDU and .GOV ?
.EDU.US and .GOV.US
Since they are only used by the US governement and US schools, i think they should be moved to
Just my thoughts..
-J
Alexis 'jeriqo' BRET
Now we can start charging money for these domains.. woop! I had lost hope in our capitalist system that we were still giving domains away for free.
Has anyone noticed that the .us TLD is now using (A|B|C).GTLD.BIZ for its root nameservers?
.BIZ, then you might not be able to resolve stuff in .US. Very interesting.
In other words, if you don't accept the ICANN version of
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi
Yet another domain to remember. We've got .info, .biz and now .us all in the past year. Now tell me again how we're better off.
.gov, .com and .edu. Enough already!!!
All these domains do is make things more complicated for those of us who have to remember all these web addresses and more expensive for companies trying to protect their trademarks in cyberspace. Maybe we should REDUCE the number of domains... From now on let's just just
Squatters.r.us
serverkiller.slashdot.us for those that want to testt there websites.
or
theshortb.us for archival of all score 1 posts.
and
RIAA.us, MPAA.us and FUCK.us, because after all they are 4-letter words meaning the same thing, right?
(I suppose that TLD in this case would mean Top Level Dicks...but I digress....)
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
Are they going to allow any type of "second-level" domain name? ".us" is commonly known as a country for the rest of the world, and is quite common outside of us (eg bbc.co.uk). Many countries also has fixed numbers of second-level domains, eg com.au, net.uk, org.ca Will that be the case here?
;-)
If not who will get screw.us? A p0rn site or another "name your price" e-tailer site??
Codeala - Just another mindless drone
long.live.the.us
you.missed.the.b.us
time.to.disc.us/s
come.to.us
visit.us
screw.us
i.hate.the.us
Okay, that's enough...
porn sites are going to spam me with www.screw.us?
--------
It's OK to be social, just don't tell anyone about it.
http://all.your.base.are.belong.to.us
http://toys.are.us
Any other funny URL predictions?
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
im still waiting for .asm so i can own http://www.org.asm. But as for .us i wonder how many people will get anti-american sites, www.taliban.says.fsck.you.us/ or www.bomb.the.us/. And what kind of action would be taken against the owner(s).
These domain names were just brain farts, i do not support acts of terrorism.
Carpe meam simiam!
Look out, here comes "ask.us!"
http://slashdot.us
testt? testy? testes....heh, corrected my typo only to make it again...sigh.
:\ ... for that one.
dang, should have been (less than symbol) 1 posts.....
Looks like I'll be the owner of the shortb.us domain...
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
comewith.us, magicb.us, dontfuckwith.us
Finally USA gets a top domain like all the other countries have. It might bring some order to the chaos.
.gov and .mil could be transferred to .gov.us and .mil.us it would almost be a perfect world :)
Now if only
/Erik
Erik Dalén
Hmmm, obviously I know less about the history of the DNS than I thought I did
Everytime this comes up on nanog, I tend to glaze over. I should pay more attention, I know...
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
If so:
please.stop.bombing.us
(will it be Funny or Flamebait?)
Knunov
Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
That would be stuff in the state of Colorado in the current, soon to be extant, scheme of DNS entries in the .us domain.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Most american companies use .com as their site. When you look at a web address, you look for the .au, the .uk, or other country code at the end. And if you don't see it, it's human nature to assume it's an american site.
Country domains
I wonder when we'll see http://goatse.va ?
Not only will the last orthodox free registrar be gone forever, but we'll have 20 million all.your.bases.belong.to.us variants.
Then again, because certain municipalities were delegated to various ISP's it wasn't necessarily free... in Richmond, VA i2020.net wanted $200 per year for mydomain.richmond.va.us. This was only after 6 hours on the phone, trying to convince various people there that they had it delegated to them...
Maybe I take these things too seriously, but it makes me sick just thinking about it.
I always thought it's fair that US companies register themselves as .com without .country sufix. It's fair because internet has born in US.
But ITOH every country has its own sufix and US has none. Now each country has its own sufix and also can register a "country-sufix-less" domain. It's much more fair to everybody.
Well, it's good to have .us domains, for me it sounds that www is becoming much more world than web.
-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
Dammit, why couldn't they take the opportunity to do it *right* for a change? .com.us domains should be given only to a real corporation with that name. .tm.us should be administered by the USPTO and subdomains given strictly on the basis of trademark ownership. Conversely, trademark considerations should not impinge on the other subdomains - as long as it is clear that this is the case, so nobody gets misled.
.org.us strictly for non-profits (or maybe .charity.us for legally recognized tax-exempt charities), .fcfs.us for strictly first-come-first-served assignment, and so on.
.us domain. Someone can buy .co.us and happily hand out the levels below that. At least until the lawyers get their hands into it...
.sealand domain names. If you can get yourself assigned a country code that is.)
You could also have
Still, one positive feature of the new setup is that there won't be artificial scarcity created underneath the
(Possible new business for Sealand: lawyer-proof
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
While a little OT (read the whole comment, moderators, before modding me down), let's hope the Government doesn't go ahead with "online voting." Imagine the heightened possibility of fraud.
"Alternate voting site: scriptkiddies.nebraska.state.us"
Some people not knowledgeable enough to know the difference could be tricked into giving away their SSN, name, home address... everything somebody needs to make credit cards out of them.
Do you like German cars?
Words ending with "us"
The last bit of organization associated with United States centric domain name organization is gone.
It sucked when .net, .org, and .com were relegated to equals rather than their intended purpose.
Now .us will just be the same.
The evolution of things? It's like this:
1. In the beginning, commercial companies who were not network infrastructure providers could only register .com, thus leaving .org and .net free for nonprofit orgs and network providers.
2. Bill Clinton came along and gave the internet to the corporations, and suddenly U.S. companies registered their names in .com, .net, and .org. Thus, using even more namespace.
3. .biz comes along, and those same companies will now have FOUR names in the namespace.
4. Now .us will be exactly the same. Now those companies will just have mytrademark.com, mytrademark.net, mytrademark.org, mytrademark.biz, and NOW mytrademark.us.
So, can anyone tell me what good this move is, rather than making them register under county.state.us?
Anyone else remember when domain names were free and you never got spam on usenet or e-mail? It was the giving up of .org and .net brought about by Clinton-Gore that got us where we are today.
When Gore "invented" the internet, what he and Clinton invented was the destruction of it's beauty as a free exchange that wasn't dominated by giant corporations wielding laws like the DMCA.
"Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
I doubt you will get it from them.
:-)
From their registration rules:
B.0.1 Identification
The domain name that is requested for the registration of an entity must neither be misleading nor obscure. San Marino RA can inform the applicant about possible ambiguities and ask for a changed application.
NOTE: The domain name that is chosen for the registration must be similar to the applicant entity name or it must be similar to one of its services, products, trade-marks and so on in order to assure an easy identification of the name itself.
So, unless your last name is Orga, or own a company that's called that way, you're not gonna get it from them.
Dunno about sex sites though: "So what do you sell?", "Well, we provide people with orga's, don't know what they are?"
I can imagine that some large companies will get the domain, simply to "collect the whole set", but do you seriously imagine that you will start to see adds for www.ibm.us on the billboards? I just simply don't see it happening.
Although i would like to see who ends up with trust.us ;-)
Am I the only one who is enraged? Neustar sucks! Look at what they did with .BIZ - just a new hyped up domain so they can bring in loads of money for companies scrambling to protect their trade name.
.US domain has been used for years without problems. I don't see why the Dept of Commerce needed to hand this over to Neustar. Neustar is going to be charging and making ungodly sums of money.
.US domain owner, I am pissed off.
The
The United States is a LARGE, well-connected country. It is NOT practical to give 2nd-level domains (joeblow.us) out to the public. The system of org.locality.state.us is much more fair as there will be less disputes. Granted, companies and organizations that span more than one locality or state should be allowed to have lower-level (3rd or maybe 2nd) domains.
I emailed Neustar (that is the stupidest name of a company I have ever heard) last week about some of these issues I am concerned about, and never received a response.
As a
This comes at a very bad time. The .us extention should have been available since the beginning. Extentionless domains (.com; .org; .net) should be classified as "worldwide sites", example: www.amazon.com should lead to Amazon's worldwide site, or a portal page that leads to Amazon's localized sites (amazon.co.uk, amazon.de, etc..). Instead, amazon.com leads to amazon's USA homepage. This is clearly wrong and a problem. The .com extention should be intended for non-localized sites, not the american site (are we too good for our own extention)?
.com.us, instead of .com, leading to a 404 or the inevitable: the site of some domain stockpiler out to cheat a few innocent individuals out of their money.
.com domain, because they are strictly a US company (just like most foreign companies do). The webmaster makes the politically-correct decision to purchase a .com.us domain.
.com domain. But, the webmaster shouldn't have to: oxygenrx isn't a worldwide corporation.
.us domains. It mixes in politics, the stupidity of the average Joe AOL-user. Another solution could be simply removing locale specific extentions... AHHHHHH!
This also leads to another problem. Smaller sites don't want to have to manage two extentions (for the sake of costs and fragmentation). A few poltically-correct people will start typing in
Here's a scenaraio:
Small US based business with a website, does no international business. Clearly, Company X shouldn't have to buy a
Once the site has been up and popularized, a potential customer hears about the site; oxygenrx. He types oxygenrx.com into his browser... 404:not found. The potential customer releases a string of obcenities, then proceeds to a competitor's site. The opposite of this is true as well.
The obvious solution to this problem would be to buy a
Another way to put this into perspective is with the naming of a company.
For example, there is a company: Brooklyn Cheese House inc. From the name, you can tell it is strictly a small local business. One day, the managment changes it's name to Cheese House International. But, it's not an international business: it's still a small retail store in Brooklyn. Surely this will confuse customers (probably those who choose to patronize a local business over a large one). Same concept with the domains: a proper name prevents confusion and improves business.
Of course, this can't all be credited to the lateness in the availability of
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
I can see why it is happening, but the organization scheme of county.state.country, imho, was a good organizationalk system -- but one that wasn't truly taken advantage of enough.
"If God's on our side, he'll stop the next war." -- Bob Dylan
Www.slashdot.us would be a great place to mirror sites before we post stories and take down poor 3rd party servers.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
all those .com, .gov, .mil, .edu, .org misused by us companies and institutions.... all these domains should be reorganised to be subdomains of .us. .eu domain.
So all countries in the world of internet are equal. For the moment the US are more equal than others. They are the pigs of the internet animal farm.
And Europe should obtain a
the internet is no more a exclusively american issue.
i will tell such thing to my favourite european parliament deputy : )
A rogue domain operator, TLDUSA, is busy spamming offers to sell/buy .USA domains for $59 per year. These are NOT .US domains, and whether or not someone will be able to contact those domain servers is problematic.
First, we've have a top level domain like all the other contries have had -- each with their own rules and rulers -- it's just that ours were outstandingly misguided.
However, I have little confidence that the new ones will be any better. In any event, there is no chance that <big-american-corp> is going to give up <big-american-corp>.com -- they'll just have <big-american-corp>.com.us too -- wheeee, won't that be special!
Shut up, be happy. The conveniences you demanded are now mandatory. -- Jello Biafra
Taliban registered in advance itsnot.us
This post
http://slashdot.org/articles/01/10/30/2331218.s
in October already talks about Neustar picking up the
So is there a foo.au?
It has to be .com.us, .org.us, .net.us or it's a complete mockery of the international system. Leave the local system in place and do something sensible. Are ICANN so toothless as to not enforce this?
AFAIK, there is precisely one exception to the rule where nobody is directly allocated a second-level domain - nic.uk is the domain of the UK domain registrar, who can award themselves any .uk domain they feel like :-) and chose "nic" (presumably if ICANN gave .uk to some other company, they'd point www.nic.uk to the new one's web server).
However, there are quite a few fairly obscure UK 2LDs other than the well-known .co.uk, .org.uk, .net.uk, .ac.uk (academic, like .edu) and .gov.uk.
Examples include .nhs.uk (National Health Service - public-funded hospitals and so on), .police.uk (police forces, like cambs.police.uk for Cambridgeshire), and .ltd.uk and .plc.uk (only available to registered UK companies, and they have to use the closest domain-compatible version of their official name - e.g. FooSoft UK Limited would have to use foosoft-uk.ltd.uk and Whatevername Industries PLC would have to use whatevername-industries.plc.uk)
god.help.us haha, sorry, I couldn't help it.
Interestingly enough, NeuStar is headed by a bunch of folk that include an IETF dignitary or two (eg. Bill Manning).
The following document details how they're going to implement everything. Section B-3 goes into what you can and can't register under ".us" as well as gives info about the trademark "sunrise" period. At least it looks like they did their homework. There won't be any "com.us" or "xxx.us", but "screw.us" and "slashdot.us" seem quite feasible.
While I don't agree with them in principle, it looks like it could have been worse.
- ez
No! But he might install a hidden camera in your toilet!
It should have been this way right from the start. Every country should have its country code as its top level domain, and that should be subdivided as best convenient for that country. In the U.S., each state would be assigned a 2-letter name under .us, and that state would be responsible for subdividing further. A big state like California might subdivide further by counties.
It should never have been simply "something.com"--this may have actually helped lead to the .com mess of the past several years, which has screwed up the tech sector so badly. ("Hey! Here's a business idea! Better register that domain name NOW before someone gets it, write up some press releases, and we're millionaires!" It's all psychology. Make the system more organized and its users will have to be too.) From the very start, people would have gotten used to the fact that some company's domain name is something.county.state.us or something.city.state.us or whatever. (Subdividing by city actually makes more sense (to me) than by county, as your snailmail address includes your street address, city and state, not your county.)
Furthermore, .net, .com and .org should only have existed for international entities; .net being for network providers; .com for multinational commercial entities and .org for multinational nonprofit organizations. ONLY! These domains, and only these domains, would be regulated by some international mess of a bureaucracy. Their rules would include a minimum number of countries you have to do business in before getting a domain like that. For example, you must do so many millions worth of business in, say, 10 countries in order to get a .com.
When limited to the U.S., these entities would have to get a .com.state.us address, and the name must be the name of the business (or entity). Registered trademarks would get a .tm.us. Federal government sites would get a .gov.us. State governments would get a .gov.state.us. County and city governments would be further organized in a hierarchy.
In short, by using rules that make sense to KNOWLEDGEABLE computer folks, a very large mess wouldn't exist now. Huge technical problems would be reduced to nothing. Legal problems would nearly go away too--we wouldn't have people fighting over domain names and stupid stuff like that. (If there was a fight, it could only happen between people in the same city (or state in the worst case) and there would be no authority to handle it--all names are first-come-first-serve. (The protection is already in place, since you have to own the appropriate trademark or have the appropriately named business in order to have that domain name.) And if all else fails, one party could buy the name off the other, as was done in the past.)
The way the system is today causes another big HUGE chunk of bureaucracy that is totally unnecessary and costs a lot of money and headaches. OH WELL.
So I went though all the domains, and noticed that only z.com seems to be a functioning website (redirects to Nissan's website.)
I was the first to register Z.COM. IANA once gave a directive that said, "all one-letter names shall be reserved to enable name-hashing at a later time". Working for a company that registered domain names on a daily basis, I thought, "If X.ORG can have a domain name, why can't I register Z.COM?" To my surprise, it worked! The following month, IANA gobbled up all the rest of the one-letter names.
A few years later, I started having people knock on my door monthly saying they'd buy or trade my domain. They didn't see much of a value to it, and neither did I. While I was a bit altruistic, I did have a price in mind where I'd do away with my domain. One day this guy offered me 50% more than that price, so I took it. It went toward a down payment on a house that later made me some real money.
The guy tried to make a simple Z.COM web portal out of it. Their gimmick was that all one had to do was hit "z" on their web browser address, and poof, there you were at Z.COM. The portal never gained momentum.
Other people bought it from him and tried again to make a portal out of it, but their gimmick was to give "lifetime" e-mail accounts if they visited the portal regularly. Again, another Z.COM portal failed, and those "lifetime" addresses disappeared with it.
The next purchaser was apparently IDEAlab. They never did anything with it and with their financial demise probably thought they should sell/dump it for whatever they could.
Enter Nissan. My guess is that they might release or re-release a "Z" car in the future.
I mildly regret selling the name away. I thought the purchaser would have done something better with it. I could give Nissan a web redirect as good as anyone else.
--
Eric Z iegast
eric@z.com
uunet!z!eric
It's so easy to be sure of oneself when ignorant.
Exactly which "Olympia" gets that olympia.us? Olympia Pizza down the street from me? One of the 1,000 other unrelated Olympia Pizza's across the US? Olympia Cruise Lines? Olympia Finance Corporation? Matt Olympia?
What about trademarks? NT goes to Microsoft or to Nortel (nee Northern Telecom)? What about the dozens of other trademarked NT's in various fields? NT adhesive or NT car parts?
Sigh - Ignorance must be bliss.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Which was when the virtually the *only* uses of it were practical. Yes, even usenet was largely a practical use back then.
I have to assume, however, that you do not.
If you did you would be aware that the changes in the net that the original poster was bemoaning have nothing, I will repeat, emphatically, NOTHING, to do with technology.
They are all strictly factors orginizational, politcal and legal. They are *human* changes, and thus behavioural.
Thus, the proper tools for change and improvement are the tools of human interaction. Debate and disent being chief among these.
If I might paraphrase Linus Torvalds, if you wish to actually say something of value to the issue, show me the argument.
KFG
I've never really seen the benefit of the top-level qualifier. It classifies sites based on a secondary property (.edu vs .com vs .org) which is not fundamentally related to how we (I anyway) view the net. I guess I can see some value in dividing up the namespace by gross geography, but even there the value seems limited; I don't see why there needs to be a 'slashdot.fr' for example. I'd rather see a single, uniform name space administered by some user-friendly process. Then we'd just say 'slashdot' or 'amazon' or 'snopes.' If you want to set up a private subdomain for your company or your nation, then fine, go at it. I see no advantage in being able to support distinct 'amazon.com,' 'amazon.net,' 'amazon.uk,' and 'amazon.sex' -- as a user, or as a business, I want a single unambiguous identifier that is reasonably free of confusion.
But that's just me.
-- We all have enough strength to endure the misfortunes of other people. La Rochefoucauld
Redundant=1
Really now. It's the "original" post that's redundant, not the comment, doht!
Use Google search as your "dns server". You don't even have to type ".com"
It's about time they got this done ...
.gov when no other government can get it? For that matter why should governmental entities in the U.S. have domains other than gov.us? Why should a local bar/pub have a global domain name?
.edu/.com/.org/etc be so common ...
The current system has led to some truly abominable domains being awarded. Why should a local park in the U.S. have a global domain name? Why should the U.S. get
It was idiocy to have
- David
Whats the deal. This has been around for years.
I have one, the city of Eugene has one , the
state of Oregon has one. The admin has changed which may be for the better or the worse ????
yet.another.silly.thing.ending.in.us
Some people are saying that the correct way of doing things is that every company registers under its own country code and only use .com domains for international or global pages.
.co.cr domain costs $50/year and I must go to the bank to pay for it, whereas a .com domain costs like $8 and I can pay over the internet.
.com domain as many others here.
This sounds fine but to me in Costa Rica a
Of course we got ourselves a
So the point is if we wanted it to be all nice and pretty then there should be a standard that all registrars should follow (pricing, registration and update procedures). This is a big mess now and there is probably no way to fix it now, even if there was some real international interest.
Perfect!
Some people go for .net as they're on the net, others go for .org as they're not trying to make a profit.
.biz, rarely .info
Where are the little guys supposed to go? they're not
http://toys.r.us ? I would make it a backwards 'R,' but my keyboard got stuck.
Given that the Cyrillic letter whose glyph looks like a reversed Latin R ('', charentity Я) says 'ya' in Russian (see the TETIS story and ndex.ru), the correct hostname would be toys.ya.us.
Will I retire or break 10K?
When limited to the U.S., these entities would have to get a .com.state.us address
Except in Colorado, where you could conceivably get .co.us to match .co.uk. Similar parallels exist such as Nebraska (.ne.us) to parallel .net, Oregon (.or.us) to parallel .org, and Alaska (.ak.us) to parallel .ac.uk.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Vatican is .va. Do you not know how to look things up?
Maybe the /. crew will register fuck.us.
does this mean somehow I can get cl.it.or.us?
had to ask...
peace in...
-smurf
New York.San Francisco.Bend
toys.r.us
"You could also have .org.us strictly for non-profits (or maybe .charity.us for legally recognized tax-exempt charities),"
.org domains are for non-profit and/or tax-exempt charities, why is this http://slashdot.org ????
If
If I'm not mistaken, CmdrTacho gets a lot of money out of this website as do many other people.
???
-Shaunak.
Oh yes, the tacho in CmdrTacho was intentional.
Shaunak.
all.your.base.are.belong.to.us
trust.us
visit.us
buy.us
shop.us
register.us
mark.us
track.us
monitor.us
implant.us
clone.us
brainwash.us
trade.us
sell.us
encrypt.us
watch.us
Simple idea for them.
We know how popular domains such as "to.us", "r.us", "are.us" and so on will be just from the response here.
These domains will go first.
If they charged, say, $10,000 for any domain sold within the first month, I'm sure they'll go a lot slower. The registrar will make a small fortune and the companies will finally start having to pay for their domain. After all, they'll almost certainly have something in the com/net/org namespace.
If you're going to jump in and say that the companies with the dollars are getting an unfair advantage, well, think of it this way. The companies will get their domains anyway, and if they don't, I'm sure they'll sue whoever for "trademark infringement".
Otherwise some private squatter will register half the namespace and make a fortune on their own greed.
boo to DNS, let's go back to using numbers and a phone book-like directory.
It always used to be that .org was for non-profits, but the rules have gotten relaxed over the years (AFAIK). If you made a domain strictly reserved for non-profit organizations, then corporations would not be able to sue for ownership of (for example) gateway.org, if a nonprofit group with that name legitimiately owns it.
:-(.
I'm talking about how things _should_ be, not how they are
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
The United States Department of Commerce may have done some underhand dealing for the .us TLD. For just one - they give it to a business that run the illegal .biz lottery. Did DoC open .us for tender?
The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem.
Virtually every word is trademarked - Alpha to Zeta or Aardvark to Zulu, most many times over (even in same country).
Trademarks are for the good of the people, as well as business. Most trademarks share the same words with many others in a different business and/or country. For example, 'cat' is used in 1746 trademarks in the USA alone. The authorities are allowing certain trademarks to be abused by their owners, giving them dominance over others. This is against unfair competition law.
The US DoC do this purposefully, also knowing they abridge peoples right to use these words - even the common words you learnt with your A B C's - like apple, ball and cat. This violates the First Amendment.
I have been in contact with various Government bodies (US and UK) and attorneys for quite some time now - they understand arguments perfectly. Nobody has denied the assertions made, not even UN WIPO.
Like I say, most trademarks share its name or initials with many others. When authorities could put trademark identity beyond shadow of doubt, they are either devoid of intelligence or corrupt. I have come to the logical conclussion, that they are corrupt.
Please visit WIPO.org.uk to see the simple solution.
When is someone going to set up .them?
big.us.dick.us
:)
and I guess we'll see a bunch of companies choosing latin-sounding names for the better looking domain name.
now stay away or I'll give you lup.us
Why does everyone feel this is good? I thought the internet was supposed to bring about globalization - where your location didn't matter for you to do business. Country-specific TLDs such as .us, .uk, .fr, etc might seem reasonable for companies which are specific only to that country, but will only muddy things more.
.com, .net, and .org are obviously too cluttered, and domains like .tv are just plain dumb (how about .media anyone?) A better TLD structure would be something like:
.net domain is now meaningless
.com, .net, .org, etc domains could be left, or phased out over the course of several years.
Suppose someone registers ibm.com.ru who isn't IBM. Suppose that country doesn't care about that person infringing on IBM's trademark? Now suppose someone in that country assumes ibm.com.ru is the country-specific site for IBM. What is IBM's country specific site is ru.ibm.com (which is how I think it SHOULD be). I can definitely see a problem here.
Does IBM register EVERY IBM.com.TLD as well as IBM.com? Should they have to do so? Seems ridiculous to me. TLDs should say something about the type/business of a company (which they no longer do) instead of stressing location. Furthermore, things will get muddier as the managing bodies decide to do force stupid things later on for "more organization" like "company.businesstype.city.state.country". Type rather than location isn't perfect, but it's BETTER than what is being proposed.
What we need are BETTER TLDs.
.media - for TV, Radio, Newspapers, and the like
.isp - for ISPs, since the
.retail - for retail businesses like Amazon, Sears, B&N, etc.
.pr0n - you get the idea
.linux - of course!
and, of course, some sort of governing body which FORCES the general business of the company to be related to the domain, or else forfeit their domain name (after a reasonable appeals process, of course). The existing
Considering that TLD are controlled by ICANN, I went searching for other TLD domains. I found out that there is underground (i.e. not official) heirarchies of alternative TLD's. It did not surprise me. The Internet DNS is, presumably, ONE large, distributed database. However, who says you cannot have many large, distributed DNS database. These "alternative" DNS heirarchies also has the ICANN TLD's (.com, .net, .org) in them for backward compatibility, but introduce 100's of other TLD's ( .radio, .hotel, .god, .etc). The downsides are the fact that potential visitors must have their DNS configured to use the heirarchy, and the collision of the namespace with ICANN, mainly the .biz TLD. Check it out at the You Cann Site.
Coderz 4 Life
The United States is where the internet and the telephone originated, so we get to make the rules concerning the low-level stuff. That's why the top-level domains are implicitly U.S.-based sites, and why the U.S. has country code "1".
You European lamers would be goose-stepping around town speaking German to each other if it wasn't for the U.S. saving your asses, so don't even try to tell me you think your countries are America's equals. Even the WWW, though actually created by a non-American, was conceptualized by an American decades ago. You don't like how we're running things, fine-- then go invent your own God damned world-wide network the European way, see how far you get.
Wow. This was really big news, a month ago when I submitted it.
Now it's just a press release. Press Releases for Nerds, Stuff That Mattered Last Month.
.FED.US and .GOV, managed by GSA, are being contracted to SAIC.
In short, they live.
I don't this that would affect OpenNIC users. When I re-wrote OpenNIC's root build script this summer, I made a few changes to is that should prevent this from affecting our users:
.biz name _can_ appear in our root this way) so, though you will be able to resolve that name, it's a bug; we should replace the names for the TLD servers as well to block cross-zone pollution as well.
;-)
1) we have a list of the ICANN root servers' IP numbers (just as an DNS server does in its cache zone file) from which we download the names and IP numbers of the TLD servers
2) we assign new names to those root servers, rather than using the names we're given, to prevent exactly this sort of cross-root pollution
3) we have the A records for the TLD servers' IP numbers in the root zoner itself, which means that an ICANN
Thanks for pointing the bug on 3) out, though it's a different one from what you were speculating about.
-robin
now stay away or I'll give you lup.us
Hey, what did I do?
(Thanks for the idea, though. Hmmm.)
--saint
> world series loving Americans, more then one country.
uh, check on what the "World Series" is . . .
It does *not* mean "world champion," and never did.
"World" was the name of the now defunct newspaper that schemed to get the champions of the two major professional baseball leagues to play each other. They slapped their name on it. The event and its name have outlasted the paper by decades . . .
hawk
hawk
In fact, about six years ago, private domains were encouraged to get *.us domains, instead of *.com domains, which were specifically for commercial ventures. Likewise, *.net was only for network providers, and *.org was only for non-profit orgs. But when the NSF stopped paying for everyone's domain name, InterNIC / Network Solutions took control of how the domains would be allocated among purposes, and that was to not allocate them at all, but blow them wide open to everyone. This of course maximised NSI's ability to sell domains. (NSI did not and has not controlled (*.us).
Web-era veterans might remember Netherlands BBS, originally at netherlands.ypsi.mi.us ('ypsi.mi' because it was located in Ypsilanti, Michigan). Eventually it was changed to nether.net. This of course worked in NetherNet's favor, because they then had a shorter hostname, and users did less typing, and there was much rejoicing.
Regardless, the current system is hardly bureaucratic -- its the opposite, uncontrolled and manipulated for profit over most beneficial function. And the solution of throwing more TLDs at the problem will only end up spanning the problem across TLDs. Sure, ICANN tells the TLD applicants who were lucky to win their lottery disguised as a review process that they have to limit who can get domains under their TLDs, but if ICANN's pattern of bending to commercial pressure continues, I expect that rule to hold for two years max.
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
DNS was never well-suited to be at the layer users interacted with the Internet. Its purpose was to identify nodes on the Internet with names. If you wanted to find the web server for a given company, you weren't expected to know or remember the company's web server's hostname; you were expected to locate them on a directory and have the software automatically send your web browser to the correct URL behind-the-scenes. Heck, even URL's weren't meant to be human-visible.
.com and .org, provided they were used for the purposes they were intended. It's just a namespace. Companies or individuals that are not geographically centered shouldn't be forced under a geographically-centered domain. You have to root those guys somewhere, so the generics are the place to be. I was rather distressed to hear that new TLD's like .biz were going to be opened up. I see no distinction in functionality between .biz and .com, and they're still intending to open them up for anyone that wants one. Now we just have ambiguity when people are trying to locate businesses. Do I try www.microsoft.com or www.microsoft.biz?
The problem is that the directory technology never matured fast enough, and was never adopted globally enough for it to serve that purpose. We're just now getting LDAP to start serving in the capacity of an e-mail directory, but short of the numerous incompatible search engines and proprietary "keyword" services out there, nothing has been able to do the same thing to sit above the DNS layer in a sane fashion.
If things had turned out the way they should have, DNS space wouldn't be traded like such a huge commodity, and we wouldn't have everybody and their freakin' pets with their own domain space sitting right off the top-level domains like we do today. It would end up as a nice hierarchy, but nobody but the techies would even care because it's not something generally exposed to the public. It's just ridiculous the way things are today.
Another poster mentioned that having his identity associated with a geographical domain name would suck since he'd have to rename everything when he moved. If things had been done right, this wouldn't really be an issue. The only naming that would need to change would be the naming of the Internet hosts that would move with him. If he was using a geographically-identified ISP and moved, he'd probably need to get a new ISP anyway, so his e-mail address would have changed. If he was hosting his own e-mail on his geographically-identified hosts, his hosts would have to move with him, so not only would he have to renumber, but yah, he'd have to rename as well. This really wouldn't have been as bad as it seems, since a higher-level directory would be what's linking his name and identity with his e-mail address, so after changing the address, a quick trip to the directory's update function would still allow him to receive his e-mail.
I really don't see a huge problem with the top-level generic domains like
But who knows, this may force a globally-recognized directory of proper names to services. As the number of "equivalent" top-level domain names increase, so does the ambiguity. Users are going to start using search engines more to locate an organization, which I see is a good thing, and the overall value of DNS space will begin to diminish.
Things will get there eventually, but many of us will be banging our heads on our desks in the mean time...
I don't pretend to understand a lot about the intricacies of the various implemented TLD system(s), but why not localize the browser to translate mycompany.com to mycompany.com.us? This way if you were trying to access Amazon's Australian site from inside Australia (and using a localized Australian browser) you'd just type in Amazon.com and be forwarded to Amazon.co.au? Likewise, if you were in the USA, type Amazon.com and you'd be sent to Amazon.co.us? Of course you could always manually type the address as well, thus being able to access non-US specific versions of a website.
It seems to make a lot more sense than manually localizing the heck out of every domain name. Especially when I don't see the country extensions as anything different than the company codes used for our phone network. You certainly don't dial the US country code to make a US to US call, neither should you do it for the web.
DigiSquid Design.