Slashdot Mirror
ICANN to Incorporate TLDs Already In-use?
An anonymous reader asks: "I recently found an article at cnn.com about ICANN considering new top level domains. Some of the proposed TLDs have already been introduced by YOUCANN such as .xxx and have been available to the public at select registrars such as new.net for quite some time. If ICANN incorporates already existing TLDs how will this impact those who have already registered for domain on these TLDs? What implications does this have and how will the ramifications impact how businesses view and utilize the web?"
Simply put, if ICANN adopts a TLD that duplicates a TLD that "unofficially" is being registered by another registration system, then we'll have a fracturing in the standards just like in the way that it's almost impossible to tell who the heavyweight boxing champion is. Whenever you have multiple self-appointed authorities, you're bound to have conflicts.
At the technical level, most users see the domain-name world through the eyes of the DNS servers at their ISP, so in order for a new TLD to be valid for that user the ISP must honor it. However, this can be overridden by using a secondary DNS server or modifying the hosts file on the users side, so we may end up seeing a wave of malware trying to monkey with a users DNS settings so that their sponsor's regisitry becomes the first one consulted. Some of the other registrars have already resorted to distributing such software in order for their domains to be valid for anybody.
At the legal level, an "I got here first" principle will be claimed in trademark lawsuits by the business interest behind these rogue TLD operations. That's going to be a bit of an iffy question, if trademark law really applies to an entire TLD, especially when ICANN is the generally accepted certifying body for TLDs.
So in the end, businesses who don't want a domain name to "fall into enemy hands" are going to have to register the same domain twice, because when this dispute is finally settled, one of the two registrations will be null and void, but it'll be hard to tell which.
Seems to me like the domain name system may get pushed over the edge on this one. It was bad enough when US businesses started to buy up top-level domains from countries that were lucky enough to have two-letter TLDs that had cute meanings to US audiences. This would even further create a "wild west" nature for domain names. ICANN's authority is downright questionable at times, and now they're about to have conflicts with pretenders to the throne.
That's what they get for trying to squat.
This really aren't new. I mean, they're new to most of the world, but there ARE alternative root servers people can use. Check out open rsc.org they tell you how to change your name server. There was also an article at wired a few years ago that talked about the .biz not really being a new domain. .biz was being used on orsc, and then icann started to use it after orsc. Anyway, just don't think you don't have options.
I don't understand YouCANN. Do they want everyone sitting around making up their own TLD's? Wouldn't that create a big mess?
Sorry, I don't think so.
Nobody's ever bought a laptop in New York City.
You'll have to compile the machine from the source code, which you can download from the city officials.
But first I need to know:
What's Your Browser Start Page?
What the hell is this even talking about?
ICANN is taking applications for registratars to oversee newly created TLDs again. However, a "parallel universe" of "unofficial registrars" already exists consisting of registration services that use various tricks to get their TLDs to be recognized by some subset of the browsing universe. The question is, if ICANN certifies a TLD that already exists "unofficially" to a different registrar, what will happen to the already existing namespace?...
It seems to be two overlapping namespaces headed for a train wreck... leading to questions over how much authority ICANN really has, and what will become of the pretenders to ICANN's throne. We're likely going to end up with multiple domain sellers claiming the root title over the same namespace, and that'll make a mockery of the whole DNS system.
I'd suggest submitting to Ask Slashdot.
See Previous discussion here
*Shudder* Their software has been responsible for more screwed up computers in my (university student-serving) helpdesk then virtually any other piece of crapware. I like the idea of getting rid of ICANN, but New.Net is infinately worse.
Simply put - more confusion.
;-)
Those who hold existing domain names are going to try and get the new ones with their domains. And cybersquatters and others are going to try and do the same thing.
Now, the interesting question would be, if I'm a porn site for petite teens, can I legally have the domain, www.microsoft.xxx?
If ICANN incorporates already existing TLDs how will this impact those who have already registered for domain on these TLDs?
Um, ICAAN will just ignore the other registrars?
Um, ICAAN will have a meeting in [nice country to visit]?
Um, ICAAN will see if we need another museum TLD?
And so on..?
Perhapse adding the DNS group as an optional component to URLS such as
//foo` being defined either in the HOSTS file or some other new system file
"http://ICANN`slashdot.org"
"http://OpenNIC`computers.geek"
With "foo" in
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
I would have pointed you to this link at cexx.org for info on how scummy new.net is, but if you visit it you'll see that new.net's scumball lawyers forced them to take it down! Instead, see this link for new.net info & removal instructions.
In summary: FSCK NEW.NET!
The ICANN has authority over domain name assignments for most top-level domains (*.com, *.net, *.org, country codes, new stuff line *.info, etc.) and has been assigned the power to create new TLDs.
Other groups have decided they want their own TLDs, so they set up their own name servers (which resolve host names into actual computer IP addresses) with the addition of databases for, e.g., *.web, *.sex, etc. This is unnofficial but technically extremely easy.
ICANN is thinking of asserting its given power over all registries and creating its own official databases for the currently unofficial TLDs. This can cause conflicts with people who have taken domain names with unofficial registries. The fault in my opinion lies with the unofficial registries for advertising an incompatible solution (to use these new names, you need to change your Internet connection settings), but the people who have registered will be in trouble if ICANN starts resolving these new domains and returning "no such domain" for ones that are unofficially registered (and of course vice versa).
I better get control of www.sex.xxx and www.nokia.mobi or I will sue
This is pure speculation, but my guess would be that ICANN would have no problems with launching domains that already exist on alternative registries. The reason they might do this is simple posturing. If they acknowleged that these domains already existed and refused to "step on" them, they'd be giving legitimacy to these alternate registries. While I have no problem with making room for other registries, ICANN probably does, as it appears to undercut their self-appointed position (with the help of the U.S. government) as the Internet's governing body.
So, to answer your question, I think ICANN would happily launch these TLDs without any consideration at all that they already exist. And yes, this will create a definite conflict with those other registries, technically speaking, since two identical domains can't exist for everyone on the Internet.
Look, this was bound to happen sooner or later, and it's going to come down to a showdown. Do we want a showdown with ICANN and the possibility of overthrowing it as the Internet's governing body? If so, this is the time to get serious about it, since anyone who is running alternative TLDs will either have to get organized and fight or get stomped into the ground. I hate to put it that way, but that's where this is going if ICANN decides to implement these new TLDs unilaterally without any regard to what's already out there.
This flood of names with very strong reasons to encourage companies to buy another domain name ("You're an adult entertainment company, but you *haven't* voluntarily gone under the .xxx TLD?" "You mean you let someone *else* buy the ford.biz domain?" etc) just reinforces my opinion that ICANN has become a whore to the name registrars. The idea of ICANN is that they make good engineering decisions for the Internet at large, not decisions based on how to maximize name registrar profits.
May we never see th
Extracts:
A new top-level domain doesn't really exist on the Internet until it is added to the root servers, so that any system anywhere on the net that is seeking that domain can find out from the root where the specific DNS servers for that domain lie.....
the operators of the root servers have a great deal of political power over the domain name system. Presently, these servers are operated by Verisign, but their policies are determined by ICANN, the organization set up to administer Internet naming and numbering schemes. Since ICANN has attracted a great deal of criticism (much of it highly deserved) for its biases towards large impersonal bureaucracies and against individual Internet users, various people have come up with the idea of "fighting back" against ICANN by setting up alternate roots.....
Setting up an alternate root turns out to be a very simple matter. The Internet has always been sort of a "do-it-yourself" thing, not centrally controlled or administered like a proprietary online service.....
a naming or addressing system only makes sense if everybody uses it consistently. If every telephone company had a different idea of how the country and area codes ought to be allocated, so that if your long distance service was with AT&T, "1-212" would reach New York City, but with Sprint the same prefix would reach Los Angeles, then telephone numbers would be in a state of chaos....
Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic Flamebait Troll Redundant
Positive: Insightful Interesting Informative Funny
Nothing to see here
I emailed you the info...
YOUCANN to customers: "You can buy a 1337
ICANN to YOUCANN: "Fuck off, c4mp3r wh0r3!!!1"
ICANN to YOUCANN customers: "PWN3D"
... canoe?
I say we just memorize IP addresses from now on. From "Hey, run a Google on him." to "Hey, run a 24.175.19.234 on him."
Karma: Bad (mostly due to all those "In Soviet Russia" jokes)
A (the only??) long term solution is to have a completely decentralised Internet. A corollary of a decentralised Internet is no IP addresses, no domain names, no coordinating body to make bad decisions.
How to do this? Beats me. It's an active research topic. The closest I have seen is freenet, but it still has a long way (and many answerless problems to be solve) before it can be said to work properly.
Anyone know of any other projects/research which are heading in a similar direction?
If I start allocating blocks out of, for example, 69.250.0.0/16 and setting up VPNs to make them work... should this bar ARIN from allocating these blocks to legitimate users?
How about if I propose a alternate TLD to an alternate root which conflicts with the ISO code for a country thats forming?
The problem with catering to alternate roots, or alternate registries of any sort for that matter, is your encuraging people to break the standard.
symetrix. We are building a religion, a limited edition.
Many of the legitimate registrars on the Internet are pretty scummy, and ICANN is coming close to the bottom of the barrel, but they can't touch New.net for pure scam-artist nastiness. Anything that's bad for New.net, their "buisiness plan" and their damn spyware is good for the Internet at large. I would love to see them forced to shut down because there are actual, legitimate TLDs that conflict with their offerings. Unfortunately, they'd probably just update their "client software" to check their DNS servers before anything actually legitimate (like, say, the customer's ISP or a root-level nameserver). Anything bad for New.net is good for the Internet at large. They are nothing but scam artists selling something they don't own (new domain names), and deserve everything ICANN in all its fascist idiocy can throw at them. There aren't many people or companies in the world I would wish that upon, but New.net has made the list in spades.
That's it. I'm no longer part of Team Sanity.
They're defined as subdomains of .new.net. So that site you just registered is really "www.mygoatpr0n.xxx.new.net"
.new.net added to the end.
.new.net version to never be attempted).
Take a look at their FAQ. To get this to work in linux, you add new.net to your hosts' file's search path, which makes it so if something fails to resolve, it tries again with
ICANN's move doesn't spell trouble for new.net immediately, but the namespace will start to break down when a real www.mygoatpr0n.xxx appears (causing the
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
I must concur with the AC post eariler, even repeat it word for word to make the point, Karma be damned.
New.Net must die. Their "special DNS software" has sneaked into and completely screwed up thousands of windows systems. Having this crapware sneak onto your system is one thing, but having it corrupt your TCP/IP stack so you can't fix the problem -- manually, or with AdAware or SpyBot Search&Destroy -- is quite another.
I would have pointed you to this link [cexx.org] at cexx.org for info on how scummy new.net is, but if you visit it you'll see that new.net's scumball lawyers forced them to take it down! Instead, see this link for new.net info & removal instructions [spyany.com].
In summary: FUCK NEW.NET!
why is icann the "real thing"?
-j
Actually, new.net works at an isp level by adding their root server as a secondary source - the official root servers would still have priority. Their windows client software is a bit more aggressive, and is bundled with software such as kazaa. If this happened, hopefully new.net would eliminate the entry in their root servers to eliminate confusion and let current customers preorder their domains on the official registry for them to attempt to register once registrations start being accepted... provided they meet the criteria set by the official registrar for that particular domain.
The reality is that the only thing that makes ICANN any more "official" than any other "rogue" system is that most people use it. But that does not make it correct. Nothing says that we must use the ICANN system. As a matter of fact, it might be better if GNU came up with their own root domain name servers and give people the option to use a DNS system based upon fairness and integrity rather than simply catering to big business. Why not a DNS system that's free and open?
What's with the drive-by modding-down of comments alluding to New.Net's crapware and its tendency to cripple internet connections?
Not officially. Can you get to these supposed domains from anywhere? Heck, if that were the case, I can set up my own TLDs, I choose .ford, .gm, .ibm, .ms, .microsoft, .walmart, just for starters.....
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Or were you just trying to be funny?
SearchIRC - Now with live chat directory!
You're trying to get /.-drones to reason,
by bringing up Microsoft?
Good luck... (by the way, you're completely right. new.net should be eradicated... its existence reminded me, just how far the script-kiddie mentality pervades the business world. Scary.)
Please tell me that was meant to be a joke; otherwise, its a terrible idea that would make a complete mess of DNS.
Why doesn't ICANN just snychronize it's registered domain database with YouCANN's "unoffical" registered domain database, and thus avoid collisons? Or is ICANN so much of a greedy monopoly that it couldn't possibly share its power, and would rather alienate thousands of individuals who registered with YouCANN in the process?
There were quite a few *real* alternate root servers, and some people even used them for a while, Alternic, our own TINC (The Internet Namespace Cooperative), and more. I helped set up one of the first alternate top level domains, the eponymous ".dot"...
.com.
Ancient history. Back when it really looked like Network Solutions was going to end up owning the root lock, stock, and root-servers.net it was important. Now, it hardly matters. The real root of the Internet is
This awful kludge new.net is doing doesn't deserve the time it takes to laught about.
DNS - (Domain Name Server) - Used to map names to IP addresses and vice versa. Domain Name Servers maintain central lists of domain name/IP addresses and map the domain names in your Internet requests to other servers on the Internet until the specified web site is found.
Exactly what part of "central" (aka unique) does the people from new.Net and such don't understand??
Imagine what would happen if Lombard Street was known for a bunch of people as 5th Avenue... How the hell would Fedex do their work?
I've been experimenting with alternative roots over the past couple of months.
.geek, .oss, .parody, .indy, .null, and .opennic . AlterNIC and Pacific Root alternate roots seem to be long gone - I haven't been able to find any current information on these alternate roots, and I have yet to come across a root zone file that allows resolution of any of their names (anybody know?).
.biz . The submitter's take that ICANN roots may soon start resolving these independent root operators is either woefully mistaken or badly misleading.
The OpenNIC root zone file seems pretty stable, and resolves ICANN domains along with opennic's own
I tried the ORSC root zone file, which is FAR more extensive, but it seems to be out of date - I couldn't even resolve some ICANN domains with it!
It seems that the YouCANN and ORSC web sites are possibly horribly out of date - can anyone verify that these projects are even active?
Now for a little editorial criticism: I don't see any indication in the article that ICANN is considering "incorporating" alternative TLDs as much as it's considering bulldozing over them, like it has for
Dude. That's why we have archive.org. When stuff is DMCAed or C&Ded, one can usually still get the stuff.
http://web.archive.org/web/20030410191057/http://w ww.cexx.org/newnet.htm
All these "other TLDs" get used for is spam anyway.
.biz or .info TLD that wasn't owned by spammers or some corporation that already owned the corresponding .com,.net, and .org already.
Oh, a few get used for silly pages (chicken.coop?) but the vast majority get used for spam.
I have yet to see a
They recognize it. Pacific Root gave up on their .biz when they realized the hopelessness of competing against a sanctioned .biz
ICANN is the authority. No one cares what "YOUCANN" and their scummy ilk are doing.
Just make a .sex or .xxx domain and force all of the porn sites to go there. Why wouldn't they want to? Offer free transfer of domains. This way, they, and parents, can keep minors away from these materials just by having a simple app (or even something built in to IE) block .xxx/.sex domains. The best way to get rid of activities like this is to give them their own place to play. An example of this is Diablo II - cheaters had their own open battle.net servers where they could cheat, and normal law-abiding players played on the legitimate servers.
THANK YOU for emphasizing this point. Those that choose to use unapproved root servers shall suffer the consequences. If you don't like the politics of TLD assignments, get off the Internet or get used to authority asserting itself.
signature pending slashdot approval
Could the owner of an existing dmoain name in one of the exiting new.net domains sue someone who registers the same domain name with the new ICANN-approved registrar under trademark law?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Someone torrent me up some fried chicken, or something. I haven't eaten in eight hours, and all I've got in the fridge is some lemonade and a box of eclairs.
And in the end, Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Ducky Lucky, Goosey Loosey, Turkey Lurkey, and Money Hungry...all were lead to the ICANN's den. http://eleaston.com/chicken.html
hello
If you want to access new.net domains on linux, you have to add new.net to the search string in your resolv.conf file.. On windows, you can either use their special software, or use an ISP which they are partnered with.. This is not the definition of a registrar in my book..
When .biz was introduced, the effect of the "alternate" roots' "biz" domain (there were multiple, conflicting ones) was absolutely nothing. Big, fat zero. .xxx to the ICANN root (my prediction).
The same thing will happen if ICANN chooses to introduce
These people never had a chance of influencing ICANN - if ICANN had let itself be influenced by them at all, ICANN would have been in so much trouble, its current problems would look peaceful.
ICANN decides what's added to ICANN's root.
Live with it.
For starters, you're never going to get away with breaking all existing URLs. Which means that "ICANN" will have to be the default.
If you want to do that, you could produce the same effect by just adding a new tld (".opennic"), and sticking everything under there -- you have computers.geek and computers.geek.opennic. You can do this *today* if you can deal with putting two levels instead of just a TLD in -- like computers.geek.reg.net or something.
May we never see th
who cares? not like anyone uses the other root servers. I know a small handful of hardcore peopel might but the vast and i mean vast majority of people dont even know about it. Heck, this is the first time i have veard of these people. If i make my own server and have . there does that mean i can stop ICANN too?
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
What implications does this have and how will the ramifications impact how businesses view and utilize the web?
.xxx, it won't conflict with UCANN's .xxx, because you can only use one at a time.
.com, and if people are using the UCANN servers, they'd see that .com, not the ICANN .com.
.com, .net, .org, and the other ICANN tld's. Then UCANN adds their own .tld's, ones that ICANN has not assigned. This way, they get the ICANN tld's, plus their own additional tld's. Sometimes, though, ICANN goes and assignes one of these extra tld's, ( like .biz) themselves, and you get a namespace collision. DNS cannot use two versions of .biz. You get one or the other. Since 99.99% of the world uses the ICANN root, 99.99% of the world sees the ICANN version of the new .tld. Then UCANN whines because now their .tld will be pushed out of the way. It irony is, of course, that this same 99.99% of people who have always been using the ICANN root couldn't see the UCANN version .tld at any time before ICANN set it up. The only people this affects are the people using an alternate root, but they've always seen things differently.
None. This isn't going to have an effect on businesses. Well, about 99.99% of them, anyway.
See, DNS, by design, has a single namespace. That is, blah.foo.bar is unique. There is only one blah.foo.bar, only one right answer. In real life, you can have two people named John Doe, in DNS, you can't.
However, there's no technical reason why you must use the ICANN view of DNS. You can use another DNS root, like AlterNIC or UCANN (or a few others), and what you'll get is a *different* namespace. So now blah.foo.bar points somewhere else. But still to only one place.
So you can use the ICANN root (like 99.99% of the world does) or you can use another root. But you cannot use them at the same time. Therefore, if ICANN chooses to make a
This is why AlterNET and UCANN have always been seen as crackpots, to an extent. They whine and bitch about these things that have no relevance. ICANN is perfectly within reason to define their namespace as they see fit. And so is UCANN and anyone who wants to. UCANN could set up their own
Additional info: An astute reader will notice that things are not quite as simple as "one or the other" as i stated above. You see, what happens is that UCANN will use ICANN's
So, for most people, including serious businesses, nothing changes.
You may not think that colliding other TLDs is a bad idea, but at least realize that they are introducing collisions.
.info, .xxx, .xyz, .foobar, etc..."
.xxx (or whatever) domain yet doesn't take away from the fact that it's the alternate roots are the ones that introduced the collision.
Icann had/has the privilege/responsibility of administering the root '.' domain. They had the power to potentially create any toplevel domain that they saw fit to create, and most people recognized the reality of "icann could create a
For youcann or any other "alternative root" to suggest that icann "introduced the collision" is a deception. The whole top-level namespace was for icann to administer! Just because icann hadn't created the real toplevel
My whole argument is based on the following premise: There must be one view of the domain namespace in order for everybody to be able to successfully communicate using those domain names. The only orderly way to allow for that single view to exist is to have one organization that is responsible for administering that namespace.
how long before someone sets up fake domains on one of these fake DNS servers then spreads a trojan (say a kegen program ) that sets this as the first DNS server in Windows networking. Initially they can have it point to the IP of the ligitimate microsoft so no one realizes then maybe one day switch the CNN, MSNBC, Foxnews etc page to "Aliens land on Mall", then have any other domain fail to connect :-p
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
DNS is a hierarchical system, and the tree has One Root. (There Can Be Only One!) That may or may not have been the best architectural design that could have been done (Pike & Thompson's paper "The Hideous Name" argues credibly that it was a Bad Idea), but that's the way it is. There's no particularly good reason that, just because there's One Root, that ICANN or Verisign or the U.S.Department of Commerce or Jon Postel's Ghost should be in charge of it, and there are many good reasons that they shouldn't be, but again, that's the way it is. (The mathematical term is "Proof by Vigorous Assertion", and it's worked fairly well here.) In fact the Cabal of 13 Root Server Operators, or some big fraction of them, could theoretically decide to stop listening to ICANN and do something better, but they haven't, in spite of much provocation, and it's unlikely that they will.
There are two basic competitors to the ICANN namespace root. One is the various "Open Root" "Alternate Root" "Orange Root" etc. folks who've sprung up and declared that they can be root just as well as ICANN's preferred root, and at one point as much as half a percent of the Internet occasionally used them to resolve TLDs. If 99.5% of the net doesn't use you, you're not in charge. Some of them have gotten into legal squabbles with ICANN or its predecessors over names that both sides claimed, and they've lost.
The more interesting case is people like new.net, who are selling shortcut namespace for subsets of the DNS hierarchy, roughly equivalent to example.newTLD.new.net. They work for two reasons - one is that new.net has gotten a bunch of major ISPs to buy in and resolve new.net names from their nameservers, and another is that most DNS resolvers have a default suffix, so if the suffix is "3ld.2ld.tld" and they can't directly resolve "example.foo", they'll try example.foo.3ld.2ld.tld, example.foo.2ld.tld, and example.foo.tld, so you can usually trick them into resolving "example.newTLD" as "example.newTLD.new.net". If enough people (or their ISPs) buy into this, you can get yourself a real market in those names, and otherwise you'll have a bunch of grumpy customers who explain that you can reach their website or email at "example.newTLD.new.net".
New.net's FAQ says that if ICANN introduces a TLD name that New.net has been selling, than individual users and ISPs will have to decide who to follow, and that new.net thinks they'll have enough market leverage to dominate. That's a big problem for a new.net user "example.newTLD.new.net" if the ICANN registry sells "example.TLD"; it's a smaller problem for them if ICANN has that TLD but none of the ICANN registries have sold "example.newTLD" yet, so maybe they need to land-rush and buy it from ICANN-space. It's $10-20 for the first year, which is the main risk. They knew the product was limited and somewhat risky when they bought it, and the risks and limitations were disclosed up front.
The more interesting case is what happens if somebody buys "example.newTLD.new.net" first and registers it as a trademark, then somebody else buys "example.newTLD" from ICANN-space, and the first group tries to seize the name, either in an ICANN UDRP arbitration, or else in a trademark lawsuit ignoring the ICANN process. Yes, either approach would be much more expensive than just spending the $10-20 to register the name directly, but sometimes somebody else registers it before you do, either as a bad faith cybersquatting ripoff (like really-distinctive-well-known-name.newTLD), or just because it's a commercially obvious generic name (li
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Being naive, I'm sure, but...
If a person sets up a site on, say, "mysite.ext" - the 'ext' TLD being one managed by an 'unofficial' namespace registrar, then who gets to see that site when browsing to, say, "http://www.mysite.ext/" ?
I probably don't - my ISP, both at home and here at my vacation address, appears to use whatever trickles down from the root (official) nameservers.
So wouldn't that person have to persuade others from using the 'unofficial' namespace registrar's settings/software/whatever to be able to visit their site in this manner in the first place ?
So now we have a situation where there may be "mysite.xxx" already for those who use the 'unofficial' namespace registrar, and in a way another "mysite.xxx" for those who use whatever trickled down from the root (official) namespace registrar.
So the person who wanted to see the 'unofficial' "mysite.xxx", having to change their settings to do so, will still see the site they are used to.
And those who never wanted to see the 'unofficial' "mysite.xxx" to begin with, will be able to see the 'official' "mysite.xxx" without fear of seeing the 'unofficial' one.
The only problem I see, therefore, is the group of people setup to see the 'unofficial' namespaces will be, in a way, unable to see the 'official' ones. But wasn't that basically the risk they took when they went for this solution ?
For what it's worth, I'd imagine that you can always set something up to poll multiple namespaces - or a specific namespace - when consulting a particular URL, and either ask the user which site they want to see if it's new, or take whatever site was stored to file earlier.
Like an extension of the 'hosts' file, if you will.
Find another Win2K box, backup the HKCU and HKLM, Software,Micro$oft,Internet Exploder keys AND HKLM,Service,CurretControlSet,Winsock & Winsock2. Next, nuke all those regristry entries on your poor users box. Reboot, import your saved values, reboot and surf happily ever after. Works on XP too. And for greater laughs!! New.net will even tell you how to screw things in linux!!
Register goatse.xxx now or later??????
Who gives ICANN the right to dictate what TLDs will be usable for our DNS lookups? Some US government agency? Hell NO! We do! Well, at least those of us who run DNS servers do. We do this by means of our vote in the form of the root hints file used in the DNS caching/recursion server. If we point our DNS servers at ICANN sponsered servers, we are effectively designating ICANN to decide for us who runs what TLD, and what TLDs even work.
We could, instead, point our DNS servers at alternative roots. Or we could create our own "." zone and fill in whoever we want for each and every TLDs, add our own, or block ones we don't like.
But really, my point is, if we don't like what ICANN is doing, we should vote with our fingers at the keyboard and switch.
It's been said this can fragment the net. And that's true. But I think the net needs some fragmenting. For example it helps keep RIAA out of my .mp3 (TLD, not file extension) web site. Only those who can figure out how to get to it can get in. I think a little fragmenting is a good thing. I highly doubt very many people will do alternatives to .com, .net, and the country codes (well, at least for most countries). So I won't worry about those being fragmented.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Mostly obscure .org domains, although even slashdot.org occasionally fails. spaatz.org, riaa.org (I'm just pulling domains out of the air).
I'm attemtping to resolve from my home box, and two different dedicated servers with different results.
anyone actually going out and buying new.net domains are akin to those who buy plots of land on the moon anyone who already spent money on a .xxx were simply asking for it.
You don't see companies going out and providing alternate telephone number space ... DNS should be a utility, and there's no need for third parties to come along and try to subvert that. Yes, sometimes ICANN's decisions suck, but I'd rather have ICANN than new.net in charge :P
neuro at well dot com (when I post, it's my opinions, no-one elses)
The purpose of YouCANN is simple. It goes like this:
YouCANN: You CANN use .xxx as a TDL.
ICANN: I CANN? Great, thanks!
I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
Please define the terms "porn" an "unsuited for minors" in a globally acceptable way first.
Claus
See this CA district court judgement regarding .web. I don't know if this has been upheld by a higher court but the judgement references several sources as support including 9th Circuit judgements and the USPTO.
what a surprise?
.fud, & .esc
incorepirate? that's ill eagle for most of US?
we're pushing for
Most of the questions on this thread seem to be running along the lines of "What happens if there is already a TLD called .xyz" or answering that question.
.xyz can it not award the contract to the registry that has already been running that TLD for years (on an albeit smaller scale), thus keeping costs low by using existing infrastructure, keeping pre-registrants happy by not having name conflicts, and avoiding the risks of using a registrar with no track record or with insipid interests?
I'd like to put another forward:
Why, when ICANN decides to introduce the TLD
Or hold on one second, does ICANN get a flying shedload of money from this? Like, UKP45,000 for *just an application* to run a new domain, and much, much, much, much more for a succesful application?
It seems to me that people at ICANN are abusing their monopoly status granted by the US Govt in order to entice bribes out of other companies in return for smaller monopolies. Somebody, somewhere in ICANN knows where that money is going - it's not needed as ICANN runs itself fine on current funs, so *WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING?*
Her site is
http://www.family1st.org
which also answers to-
http://www.lds.family -- the "New.net" domain name
I run my own nameservers so all I did is set up the DNS like so: (short version)
Works like a champ for my wifeyThe New.net spyware is just your run of the mill hijacking programs that can be deleted by using HiJackThis.
Get it at http://www.spywareinfo.com/~merijn/index.html
My Doctor prescribed daily nasal saline irrigation, hehe
Rather than: What implications does this have and how will the ramifications impact how businesses view and utilize the web?
The question should be: What implications does this have for how web users view greedy businesses who are out to make a fast buck without any consideration for the bigger picture & long-term effects on the environment in which they operate? (eg. new.net)
And that question generalises somewhat beyond this particular context.
[...] There will be chaos, and [...]
Who is supposed to be causing chaos? The people that is supposed to control the root of the DNS (bad or not, they are the people that have been chosen to control it), or the people that thinks that having lots and lots of TLDs would be scalable?
I don't like ICANN too much, but I still prefer ICANN than those people that creates new TLDs just as an opportunity to have profit.
> What are you talking about? This is not a case of domain squatting.
New.net and YOUCANN are TLD squatting.
One is spyware. Both are moronic and not taken seriously by anyone outside of spammers and people in serious denial.
(Disclaimer: I am not the OP.)
Novel idea, but who'll settle the hundreds of thousands (or more?) claims, for free?
Would almost have to be some free autoregistrating ala Wikipedia - so multiple entries (companies/organizations/people etc) with same name shares an ambigious page.
But competitors may use nasty tricks as registrating companies in order to blog up an amb. page etc. How can the Open community handle the millions willing to fraud for profit?
I think there should be a .personal or .pers or something for personal websites. Here in Oz you can only get a .com.au if you are a registered business. If there is a .pers you could avoid them or whatever.
-- Karma Karma Karma Karma, Karma Chameleon - Boy George
This reminds me of a situation at a former workplace.
This workplace (a major U.S. corporation) has its own telephone network. Dialing local phone calls from the PBX was done by dialing 9-NXX-XXXX. Long distance was 8-NPA-NXX-XXXX, but calling a different facility in the corporation is 8-NXX-XXXX, where NXX in the latter case was a 3-digit code assigned by the company (ours was 639+extension, but to call from the normal phone network was 518-454+extension).
Anyway, the corporate network took advantage of the fact that the area codes always have 0 or 1 in the middle digit, and used this to tell the two apart.
In 1995 or so, NANPA started issuing area codes with non-0-or-1 middle digits. This hosed everything up. As I no longer work for that particular corporation, I don't know what they did about this, but while I was working there (c. 1996), a few of the exchanges became valid area codes, and had to be changed.
Strikes me as the same basic problem.
www.wavefront-av.com
.mp3 TLD? you must have meant .ogg TLD?? =P
.music would have been better? .msc or .mus - any other suggestions?)
Seriously,
( I don't like
As I posted the other day on here when the new TLDs were first discussed, I know that at least some of these 'new' TLDs are already in use and registered with OSRC.
Clearly, we have a problem !
R.
New.net = Spyware
What do you do when you discover that the star you bought from the National Star Naming Association or whatever other scam company happens to be named a rather mundane Ursa Majoris B by the people who actually have the AUTHORITY to name stars?
Three years later do any of you actually use sites with .biz, .name, .info TLDs? I mean, do you actually type one of these TLDs into your browser or To line? Or do you actually use a .com / .org / .net website that redirects or links to one of these goofy TLDs?
.biz, .info, .museum, .whatever domain into my browser or mail client or address book. Why do we need more useless TLDs? The only one I sort of understand is the .mobile, .m, .mobi, whatever it is they're trying to get for the wireless stuff.
.org .com .net .mil + country-specific TLDs are just about enough, thanks.
Personally, I've NEVER ONCE typed a
Believe me, most of these new TLDs are just not gonna get used, people cannot cope with so many arbitrary namespaces. The
I mean, so what if you can't find a specific domain name available for you to use in your desired namespace? There's a PERFECTLY GOOD REASON why. Someobody else is using it already. That's what names are about. They IDENTIFY things.
If you try to solve a perceived problem of diminishing name availability by piling on new namespaces, it will only cause confusion and remove meaning from names.
If IPv6 removes the need for host header redirects, then domain names won't be vital anyway.
Web browsers can simple come with links to Google's and yahoo's IP addresses and they can switch to using IPs in their search results.
This way companies can fight it out for relevance on the keywords they want, and users get to make the final choice of which site to go to.
And who gets to decide whether something is or is not a porn site? If I want to publish a quote from Lady Chatterly's Lover on my blog, do I have to get an .xxx tld first?
At the legal level, an "I got here first" principle will be claimed in trademark lawsuits by the business interest behind these rogue TLD operations. That's going to be a bit of an iffy question, if trademark law really applies to an entire TLD, especially when ICANN is the generally accepted certifying body for TLDs.
.shop domain names, and my competitor registers foo.shop with ICANN, I can argue that his use amounts to a trademark infringement. So there may well be some value in registering new.net (or other alternative root) names.
That's not quite the issue. The TLD itself is probably not trademarkable. But the name + tld certainly is. If I now own foo.shop under the new.net scheme I can trademark that name. If ICANN subsequently issues
TLDs have been pointless for awhile -- they're little more than money-grubbing schemes by would-be registrars.
Check out any registration site out there now. You'll find that most people will just register all the non-ccTLDs they can whenever they register a domain name. In fact, they're ENCOURAGED to do so.
All more TLDs do is add more options to that list so that the new central authorities for those TLDs can start raking in the cash.
The only real solution is a total overhaul to the way web pages are addressed. Rather than a DNS-specific method, a context-sensitive model would be infinitely more effective.
The other non-ICANN orgs are essentially selling property deeds for land on the moon or mars. Something that will be ignored by others. The folks who went to YOUCANN (or whatever they are called) wasted their money and time.
If you have the most money, and government backing, you get to make the rules..
And you get to take away the other kids toys.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I've personally had a windows 98 machine that would bluescreen when any TCP connection was made. It took me hours to track down the "plugin" they install in the registry for winsock and remove it.
If you were stupid enough to buy a domain from an "unofficial" root or something like "new.net" you got what you paid for. I quasi-domain with no official backing.
.mud domains.") then you are taking a risk using one of them. Short of having one governing body for this stuff there is the risk of multiple alternate roots and TLD providers all claiming the same TLD.
If ICANN releases the same TLD and it screws up access to your site... too bad. You took that risk by going with some unofficial TLD vendor. If the new ICANN TLDs screw up your site, then you are just being bitten in the ass by the choice you made. Tough luck! Tell somebody who cares!
I'm not against alternate roots. But unless ICANN gives it's blesssing to a TLD (ie: "Ok, OpenRoot, you can manage all
Besides, do you really want a domain that only a fraction of the people in the world can even get to?
What I'd like to see is the .here TLD (or some other appropriate TLD) be reserved like the RFC1918 IP ranges (192.168.x.x 10.x.x.x, 172.16.x.x 172.17.x.x), and be used for names that only have significance within a local physical context.
: //microwaveoven.here/quickoff?confirm=Ade31x 2zf3t o
.com TLD wannabe.
.local TLD is in informal use, I believe it has too much pre-existing "meaning"/baggage especially in computer networking contexts. A new and different TLD would be a better idea.
e.g.
https://microwaveoven.here/cameras
https
https://airconditioner.here/set?c=25;fan=au
https://whos.here/
https://whats.here/
I argue that reserving such a TLD would be more useful than making yet another
I have proposed this to various members of the ICANN more than once (Ms Dyson actually replied but nothing much happened), but since I don't have USD50K or whatever it takes to propose a new TLD, nor am I anyone influential, I'm not getting any traction.
I'm sure not going to beg/borrow USD50K and then spend it on trying to reserve a TLD in order for the whole world to safely use privately for _free_.
I even wrote an Internet Draft, but no interest and it's expired.
While the
Sweet my knowledge of latin is almost useful...
:-) ok now mod me down off topic ...
"Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum (I think that I think, therefore I think that I am.)"
- Ambrose Bierce
It looks as though the person you quoted merely copy and pasted some words without the use of latin grammer
if your translation were to be correct, the phrase would have to be "Cogito me cogitare ergo cogito esse"
this is because the "I think that..." is an indirect statement construction that requires infinitive verbs and accusative subjects(the me).
www.first.post anyone?