Slashdot Mirror
Is It Time For .tel?
Vitaly Friedman writes "ICANN, the body responsible for creating top-level domains, is considering a new one. Conceived as a way to easily manage contact information in an age where many people have numerous contact numbers, the proposed .tel TLD would allow individuals and companies to keep all of their contact information in an easily accessible location. Companies would get companyname.tel while individuals would be able to register firstnamelastname.tel." This idea has been kicked around for quite a while; one of the question is the whole name-space collision issue. For instance, there's me and then there's other me. Lemme tell how strange it is getting fan mail for country music stars.
This may pose a problem with the 526,000+ people sharing the name Michael Smith.
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
This is way better than .biz, which I can only guess that they just banged out without thinking twice about.
Maybe it's about time we stopped conforming to top level domains?
.com, .us, .ca, or dot anything?
If I want a web site, why can't it be www.boxlight -- or www.boxlight.this.is.cool -- why does it have to end in
boxlight
We can put it to good use like .coop, .cat, .biz, .arpa, .aero, .info, .jobs, .mobi, .museum, .name, .pro, .travel, and .int.
.tel.
God knows it's time for
In the spirit of delicio.us, I can see a porn site called showand.tel being registered.
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
In the discussion on the proposed .mail TLD I already pointed out why this won't work.
It's pretty fun to watch ICANN and the domain industry constantly come up with new "specific-purpose" domains, which upon release sell to absolutely anyone and everyone regardless of the actual category of the site. Apart from the actually restricted ones like .gov, .mil, and .edu, sites' categories have had little to nothing to do with their domain extensions for ages now.
.com actually meant a for-profit business, or when every .org was an organization of some kind?
Who still remembers when a
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Of course that's another chance for ICANN, VeriSign and domain name resellers to cash in without much of a hassle, due to DNS' easily extensible and robust nature - however, much like .info and .name, this TLD presumeably won't be a big hit. .com, .net and maybe .org only, plus maybe their country's TLD.
The problem with all these newly introduced TLDs is that they don't ring a bell for the average joe on teh intarweb, since most casual users are familiar with
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
No way. Why should I change? He's the one who sucks!
.Tel with that!
When is everyone going to stop assuming that issuing new TLDs is going to solve all their problems? What, is it impossible for people to update the contact information on their personal web sites now, or has their been some fundamental change to HTML/XML of which I am unaware?
This is a dumb idea. I won't even touch the personal namespace problem, which should be evident to anyone with a brain. The only way that would work is if everyone had five names. You know there are going to be squabbles over company names, as old and new companies jockey for the .tel names that offer them the best marketing bang for the buck.
Need a place to put your contact information? Try www.contact.your-web-site-name-here.whatever. ICANN needs to stop polluting the TLD pool.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
while individuals would be able to register firstnamelastname.tel.
Wow! I wish I could do that now!
-Wellington Grey
Silver Clipboard: Time Management Tips
... in.tel ?
One stop shopping for spammers
Are doomed to reinvent it.
So lets see, we create a whole separate _TLD_ that people/companies must register, just so people can have www.foo.tel, which is essentially a directory of who's who at www.foo.com?
This is completely idiotic. How about "finger @foo.com | grep -i 'your name'" Obviously wrap it into some kind of GUI, or do something as simple as a web front end to an existing in-house address book?
Geesh. Next someone will invent the ".mail" TLD, which is the address for foo.com, that you use to send email to. what about ".web" ?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Todd Masonis, a co-founder of contact management service Plaxo Inc., is familiar with the hassles of keeping track of everyone. His parents have had the same house and phone number for some 30 years, and "for a long time that was how they are identified," Masonis said.
Really? Your parents are called Mr and Mrs 945 Chestnut Street? How odd.
-Grey
Silver Clipboard: Time Management Tips
I think it is time for a new scheme all the way around. DNS was designed to make finding resources easier. Now that we are almost to the point of passing out all the 'easy' domain names, why shouldn't we develop a better solution? If I had bought SEARS.biz, do you think that SEARS would be seeing a lot of my traffic? IPv6 will only make this even more difficult. Once we get to the point of having every single appliance we own on an IPv6 address and administrated over the Internet, we will need a better catalog based scheme that is rooted to each consumer. Something like: www.ixixi(nationalid#).home.kitchen.coffemaker I would expect that National ID #'s will have to come into play since it should be unique. Just some thoughts. I am interested to see responses as this is quite perplexing to me based on how exponentially the Internet is growing.
Conceived as a way to easily manage contact information in an age where many people have numerous contact numbers
.com, you have a "Contact Us" link...
Ugh?
Can you get any more pointless than this? If you have a
This should be seen as an opportunity rather than a problem, since it's a real pain in todays global society that multiple people have the same moniker. Simply require that each persons name be unique in order to qualify for a .tel, and if it isn't they must change it by deed poll (or whatever legal mechanism in their country) to be so, by addition of one or more middle or nick names, or other modification. Thus JeffHemosBates.tel etc.
;).
Problem solved
Oh no... it's the future.
.tel provides nothing that currently isn't available right now- Companies have contact pages with the information that you need to fax, phone, or email them your enquiries, people have their email and myspace pages, and all that I can see a .tel page doing is a refer URL forwarding.
I see this as another $35 per year revenue for the domain registers.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In recent years, ICANN has approved ".eu" for the European Union, ".jobs" for human-resources sites, ".travel" for the travel industry, ".mobi" targeting mobile services and ".cat" for the Catalan language, bringing the number of domains to 264. The organization also is in negotiations to create ".xxx" for porn sites, ".asia" for the Asia-Pacific community and ".post" for postal services.
.com, .net, .org and .gov. That should cover it"
.jobs and .travel"
.com, .net, .org, .gov, .jobs, .travel and .asia. Good work men, I think we've covered everything now."
Is is just me, or is the TLD names space getting more and more schizophrenic? What must it have been like when they were deciding the name?
"OK, we'll have
"What about the travel industry? Don't they need one of their own?"
"Well, I'm not sure..."
"And job hunting websites! They need one too."
"OK, OK. I'll and
"Don't forget about Asia!"
"Oh shit yeah, can't leave out 1/4 of the world now can we? Ok,
-Grey
Silver Clipboard: Time Management Tips
I think ICANN has fallen in to the same pit as any other "Governing Body". We may have finally defeated the stupid .xxx idea, and here comes the next brain fart.
.tel domain. Especially for straightening out the IP phone problems private companies are proprietarily solving themselves. But ICANN will never think of pratical applications.
Just what do they plan to do about the 1.1 million "John Smith"s that live in the use (not to mention any other countries? Append a number? Gee that sound familiar.
I can see some excelent uses of the
All these governing bodies should be returned to the only people who really governed well in the first place, educational institutions. But that's just my $0.02
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!
-- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
Wasn't .info supposed to accomplish something like this? And now its just the TLD of choice for > 90% of the spamming domains that want to sell me their generic viagara soft tabs or "PE patches".
I don't get why an individual would want to buy a domain name and server space just to park their contact information. Are they aiming for the business individual? Why couldn't I just put it on my regular website? I don't see the point in getting a domain name for this. Like the artical stated, this is overkill for something that is already done. Search engines already find contact information for companies that have it on their regular site. Plus if a company did do this it would take a while before the search engines would be it up. Googles sandbox time is like 6 months, so for about 6 months people wouldn't be able to find a companies contact info unless they found it through the company site.
Can I bum a sig?
It's not that I don't want to see ".tel" happen, but what is taking them so long to approve and implement new top-level domains anyway.
.tv, .biz and .tel (and .xxx) from the very beginning and at least a dozen more for each specific area of interest/business, we'd not have the ridiculous situation with domain scarcity we have today (even if, as I wrote earlier, it's still possible, although frustrating, to find a good .com domain nowadays).
It's because they were so late to introduce a large variety that ".com" become synonymous with "web" and everybody wanted his site to be a ".com"
Should've they introduced domains like
$35 for a domain name. Where do you register at? But yes this is definitely a lame attempt to make more domain names for more money. I've got a suggestion for the porn extension. Instead of .xxx how about .cum. It sounds like .com, and it relates to the business. I think people will enjoy saying it. You can even start a free email service called hotmale.cum.
Can I bum a sig?
companyname.tel is so much better than companyname.com/contact.html!
Man, I'm in the wrong business; if only I could get paid for coming up with ideas like this...
It's official. Most of you are morons.
I was thinking of buying ho.tel. That way clients can easily find the number for a pro they like.
Can I bum a sig?
http://synthesizer-pa.tel/
Now I just need to find a way to get an alarm system hooked up to it.
This is a moronic idea. I'm sure someone else in the thread has explained why by now. Here's my beef though: domain names are a fundamentally bad idea.
o ld=3&mode=thread&commentsort=0&op=Reply. But this is an implementation detail. Why am I, a consumer, being exposed to this? Irrelevant implementation details should be hidden from the user! Is what we're seeing now really so far removed from showing me slashdot's IP address? We cover up IP addresses with domain names, because we know it's too hard for people to remember a series of random numbers, but why can't we go the next logical step after this?
Think about it. Do we still need domain names? People made up the "I'm feeling lucky" ifl: protocol as a joke, but isn't it true? Can't we find anything with Google anyway? Why should we have to remember a particular address with a complicated system of slashes and characters to get to a particular page? Right now, my URL is http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=183301&thresh
Here's what I'm proposing:
Let's extend ifl: or something like into a real protocol. A trusted source, or better a network of user selectable sources, assigns keywords to URLs based on tagging by users via hyperlinks to the source and delicious-like tags. Normally, the URL bar shows nothing but the title the site has given itself (in our case, "Slashdot") and the particular page being viewed ("Reply to thread"), but on request, the URL bar can generate a user shareable set of keyword tags for the site with hash codes for pages to prevent collision (think about the addresses generated snipurl and the like; "ifl:Slashdot/4bacc23"). For the purposes of bookmarks, traditional URLs can be stored, but since these URLs won't be exposed to users, Ford Motor company can use a23rf2.ifl and Ford Modeling Agency can use j737bdh.ifl, and no one will care, since it won't be possible to hijack a keyword without the agreement of the majority of users. (No more Whitehouse.coms!) Domain names can stick around, so that people are free to assign multiple IPs to the same site, but the concept will become a background detail that users need to know nothing about. Until the technology is built into all browsers, URL-to-ifl translator sites can fill in the gap: "go to http://ifl.com/Slashdot/4bacc23 or just ifl:Slashdot/4bacc23..." but since this won't be hard to integrate into browsers as a plug-in, I imagine it can be implemented quickly.
So, what do you guys think? Am I being naive about the possibility of the keyword space being kept pure without a registrar? Need I point out that the keyword space is *already* polluted, inspite of that barrier?
Yes, so I can have FirstnameLastname.tel, with my telephone number, so the telemarketing scum can associate my name with my number and bother me.
Yes, that sounds like a GREAT idea - I think I'll also put my social security number, my alarm codes, a Google maps link to my house, a picture of my house key, and my bank account numbers up there as well.
Look, if my company wants to set up a contact page they can set up a web page under their already existing domain name. If I want a contact page, I can set it up under my already existing personal web space. What does a new TLD add to this?
Now, *IF* they were talking about a new transport class (like http:// and ftp://) for encapsulating telephone numbers, such that a link to tel://8675309 would get me Jenny on the line, that *might* be useful.
But hell - I haven't even signed up for MYCALL@arrl.net to avoid being spammed by any asshole who scrapes my callsign (and I already have this one jackass who has done exactly that - he scraped my callsign and now he keeps adding me to stupid services like plaxo and the like, even though I've told this tool quite sharply that I don't want him bothering me.)
www.eFax.com are spammers
The domain name .me.uk was originally design for firstname.lastname.me.uk but I only know of one site to use it, and that's a big torrent site. This domain name is pointless except for making companies buy yet another TLD, which really isn't required.
In the first few days, every common name in the phone book will be registered as a domain by cybersquatters, and no one who actually has that name will be able to get it unless they pay the domain ransom anyway. Due to name collision, people will have to resort to strange permutations of their actual name anyway.
So, what's the point, other than getting some more money for domain registrars?
It's stupid to go through the TLD process, domain name auctions and everything else. That's why DNS already lets companyname.com have tel.companyname.com without any bureaucracy other than the internal bureaucracy.
Could you imagine how much more contorted the Web bubble would have been if we had to go through this for "companyname.www"?
The existence of this stupid debate shows that ICANN is a worthless extra bureaucracy with zero knowledge or consideration of Internet design. They're just a gang of fatcats carving off their slice of global power by perverting the good work of engineers.
--
make install -not war
Turkish TLD authory with Turk Telecom tried this .tel thing, zero success.
Reason: Nobody wants his/her phone number all over the place.
So if you have a name that others don't have then you'll be fine. Of course if you are in the vast majority of people who don't have a unique name then unless you are quick its not going to work for you.
Genius idea, formed on the fact that "John Smith" is of course unique. Hell there have been TWO US presidents in the last 20 years who would have to argue over who got the domain name. This is before we get to countries where its more common to be known as lastname.firstname rather than firstname.lastname.
Or is part of this wonderful suggestion to have every person in the world given a unique name?
Oh hang on... its actually just a simple scam to get people to pay more money isn't it? Damn I was nearly taken in thinking it was trying to be a sensible suggestion.
Next week ".rocks" and ".sucks" you would of course what johnsmith.rocks and would want to prevent people registering johnsmith.sucks, double your money and double the fun.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
We also have this whole IPv6 monkey looming and IPv4 is showing it's age daily.
Then we have these glorified whois hacks that crop up and people want to have
So my idea is to start "mandating" the IPv6 IP blocks be issued and properly tracked. Address information to IP address needs to be databased and it needs to be easily updatable as well as access by various organizations to provide 911 type information. It's time to rebuild it better. Then as we do that we should also correctly and accurately database whois. VOIP could easily be the killer app that pushes IPv6. Plus there are already plans to use some of those address bits for geographic routing. It seems to me that another TLD just digs the hole deeper and it's not like ICANN are doing that great of a job to begin with.
Why not:
ur-domain.ur-tld/contact.ext !?!?!?!?!?
Whooooo the simplicity....
"You will do foolish things, but do them with enthusiasm." - S. G. Colette
Why do we need even more top level domains? So that companies must register yet another TLD to keep people from claiming pepsi.tel?
.net, but of course we had to buy the .com because everyone types it... and the .org just in case... and what's this I hear about .co and .biz??? (comment from the PHB)
In the minds of the vast majority of internet users, the extension is an afterthought at best. The company I work for is a
Real progress would be in moving to simplify things; less top level domains. How about just one for governments, one for schools, and one for absolutely everything else?
ppl will use the domain name like any other domain name currently in use so while u now have google.com, tailorma.de and engli.sh u will also have ho.tel
_ In Egypt Networks: Network Solutions with a Twist
Another round of Apple vs. Apple lawsuits, only this time, for a crap TLD.
When you're looking for $company, are you going to type in $company.com, $company.fr, $company.de...
Or are you going to type google.com and search for $company?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Wow! If only someone had thought of that before!
All's true that is mistrusted
Basically, the already established gTLDs are already pushing the limit of whatever is plausible and what is the purpose of DNS. The purpose is to establish names of hosts based on either geographic location or the type of organization. .xxx was a stupid idea because it was about the intended use and content of the domain, for which DNS is ill suited (The DNS shouldn't care what content goes where). As it seems, .tel doesn't seem to solve any of the existing human-to-that-person's-contact-info-server mappings (Zillion people with same name, not to even mention the companies with similar names), nor does it really solve findability ("Okay, to get Foeh Bahr's contact info, what's his domain name? foehnbahr.tel? Darn, that's not him, that's the other guy. To hell with this, I'll just Google it.")
Instead, we need a new protocol for this. Wait, we already have several different directory protocols that provide contact information really easily! Someone should make an LDAP client a standard feature of the web browsers, make a spiffy interface, and provide a free directory service for Ordinary Citizens. Maybe Google's next idea. =)
DNS isn't meant for contact info lookups. LDAP is. Heck, even finger protocol is a better protocol for this than DNS.
There already is a service that allows you to use keywords instead of URLs.
http://www.aol.com/
Enjoy!
What you describe is, in fact, the original way the web was supposed to work. URLs were supposed to be a hidden layer of server-specific information; users would refer to pages via URIs, Uniform Resource Identifiers, and there would be a mapping layer from URI to the current URL.
Unfortunately, URLs and DNS hacks turned out to be "good enough", nobody saw the need for a global location-independent naming system for web pages, and we ended up with today's system.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Yes, lets have another domain because .biz and .info have worked so well... Are there any .biz or .info domains that aren't just spam/scam sites or simple redirects to the .com? (I'm sure there are, but the vast, vast majority of them are spam/scam sites.)
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Try getting hit up for autographs after being MISTAKEN for a country music star in person! It happened to me...
Back in the old days I was in the broadcasting business, and stuck at a tiny country music station in the hills (complete with shag carpeting on the studio wall as sound deadening material) and was forced by my employer to attend a Tim McGraw/Faith Hill concert. (Forced: As in, "If you don't go to the show Saturday, don't come to work Monday.")
I wore a hawaiian shirt because before the forced three hour tortue session I attended a luau-themed party, and came directly to the show afterward.
In the parking lot after the show when I was trying to get BACK to the luau party as fast as possible, I was approached by several younger fans who swore I was the guitar player from Tim McGraw's band. (In an arena setting, one chubby guy with a beard in a hawaiian shirt looks like the next, I guess...) After denying for ten minutes I was this guy they pulled out the ultimate redneck "one-up" comment... "What, you're too good to sign my kids' shirts?" I finally gave in, signed their T-shirts "This is the worst autograph ever, Karl Cocknozzle" and moved on with my life.
I'm thinking if the kids ever learned to read, they were probably disappointed.
Who did what now?
So does the U.S. military have dibs on acquiring dontaskdont.tel as a portal to select the armed forces branch website you want to visit?
I'm really eager about this new possible top level domain! Please, .tel me more!
This may pose a problem with the 526,000+ people sharing the name Michael Smith.
reference
Samir: No one in this country can ever pronounce my name right. It's not that hard: Samir Na-gheen-an-a-jar. Nagheenanajar.
Michael Bolton: Yeah, well at least your name isn't Michael Bolton.
Samir: You know there's nothing wrong with that name.
Michael Bolton: There was nothing wrong with it... until I was about 12 years old and that no-talent ass clown became famous and started winning Grammys.
Samir: Hmm... well why don't you just go by Mike instead of Michael?
Michael Bolton: No way. Why should I change? He's the one who sucks
I'm just so excited that there might be .tel approved. I'm calling all my friends now and waking up those in different time zones to let them know. Its such a great moment.
.xxx and a .sex and a .insertoffensivedangerouswordhere and a .icannsucks
ok, enough sarcasm. I've ALWAYS been in favor of an alternate open DNS system where we can do whatever we want without the ICANN interfering. In particular, I think its time to drop the . (dot) and start allowing people to create whatever name they want. I know, its just going to be such chaos to give people infinite choices.
Its time to can the ICANN - let them have their root servers and tell them what they can do with them and their slow-poke committee. I'd switch to an alternative for primary resolution if one were available. And guess what, I'd be the first to create a
Lets take back the internet.
...do you think nextel will pay someone to change their name to 'nex' and let nextel use their .tel?
I blame geof's speakers.
... to keep track of the TLDs:
http://www.com.tld lists all .com domains ... et cetera
--- Attorneys Assisting Citizen-Soldiers & Families -
I think you are thinking of .name rather than .me.uk: .name was the firstname.lastname.name design - me.uk was just name.me.uk . On the plus side, Nominet is slightly strict with the second level domains (just try getting a .ltd.uk domain name which doesn't exactly match your company name - or a .sch.uk one if you aren't a bona-fida school) and this does have benefits. I managed to get a three letter me.uk domain matching my initals - the same initals as a major car recovery service: they've got the domain name in practically every other extension, but since they aren't a "person", they can't have the .me.uk domain name - leaving it to moi! ;)
If IANA goes with a .tel domain, they better use E.164 formatted numbers with ENUM. Anything less would make them complete fucking retards and result in .tel becoming a fantastic failure. Using ENUM will allow anyone in the world with a phone number to have their own unique internet domain, and the telcos provisioning the numbers would be responsible for making the associated domain available to the phone number's assignee. Whip up a site at that number and you could run an applet to receive voip calls to your line via the fucking website... how awesome would that be?
10-digit NANPA numbers should be directly accessible under .tel; for example, www.212-555-1212.tel would be a New York City number. Non-NANPA schemes could be accessed using the country's domestic numbering scheme followed by a country code; a typical London number could be expressed as www.020-1234-5678.uk.tel. Or alternatively, you could type the E.164 format to reach either number, such as www.011-212-555-1212.tel, or www.44-020-1234-5678.tel. As mobile internet improves, you would alternatively see more and more .tel sites being hosted directly on the recipient's device. Imagine typing in a phone number in your browser and it takes you directly to a hosted page on the actual phone. You could leave a text message or a voicemail without having to dial the number and possibly disturb the recipient, or choose to place a voip call if you really do want to bug them. But all of this will be pointless if they fuck it up and go with first/last names.
firstnamelastname.ssn
simplifying identity theft!
unwantedmail@company.spam
simplifying spamming!
internet.tax
the online way to pay your online sales tax!
no.
We should eliminate all top level domains and simply go with country domains. At least this way, the legal aspects of trademarks and their domains can be handled where they belong.
.com. Each country would have its own independent domain structure. For example, you might have a *.com.us domain for U.S. corporations. Microsoft would become Microsoft.com.us in the United States, and Microsoft.co.uk in Britain. There would no longer be a Microsoft.com.
.gov domain. Whitehouse.gov would become Whitehouse.gov.us. In the U.S., you'd have senate.gov.us, while you have senate.gov.ca in Canada.
I'd even get rid of
And we should get rid of the
In federated republics like the U.S., each state or province would have its own Subdomain much like the old U.S. domain setup (execept I'd include a com.us, edu.us, and gov.us domains for country wide institutions). That way, Widgets R Us in Texas would not have the same domain as Widgets R Us in California (unless, of course, Widgets R Us is a nationwide chain). Basically, where ever you register your trademark, that's where your domain will be.
The top level domains would become virtual domains. That is Microsoft.com in the U.S. would become Microsoft.com.us while Microsoft.com in Britain would be Microsoft.co.uk. This could easily be resolved by the nameserver.
No more ICANN, no more cybersquatting, no more land grabs for every new toplevel domain that's opened up.
AMD claims in.tel and the Elvis fanclub calls dibs on heartbreakho.tel.
What is this going to cost? .com .org .net?
.org .net .com they can forget about it.I can get free subdomains from alot of hosts.
I don't care about domain searching.Google is superior.
What is difference from
Any advantage? or pure hype?
What different from just MySpace address?
What is difference from VOIP database?
What is going to prevent me to register
dozen accounts like MySpace?
What is the service based on? Telephone numbers? Personal pages? Free links?
Any CONCRETE attribute you can track users on?
Seems liek new domain TLD = just hype.
Unless they(The registrar(s)) back up it with better terms then
and I get a forum as a bonus too( i could use it(editing main template/settings) to redirect to another site or load frames from some host). getting a shorter domain isn't my priority.Unless it free and has some unique features which are better then free forums with subdomains or DYNDNS(or any hosting already Existing On The Market).I.e. Extremely Unlikely.
Yeah, and when I first heard of it I though "Hey, I could register [mylastname].name, and let all my family have free [theirname.mylastname].name reg within it". Then I read their obnoxious rules that effectively prevented that, that would have instead required each family member to pay individually for each one, and wrote of .name as a complete waste.
So how would that problem be solved with the name change. I know a middle initial wouldn't solve that. Would we have to just battle to the death and call it good? It would really just be killing two birds with one stone. First, you'd be practicing Darwinism (population control and promoting the best fit members to continue society) and secondly, you would keep yourself from being confused with another one of your "impersonators" But then again...I wouldn't mind being confused with a Physicist, but maybe I would mind in other cases...he just throws out facts and peddles wares, them's none the coolest!
I think the submitter makes a good point about name-space collisions. I also have a country music star namesake, and I'm sure we aren't the only ones. Is there some sort of support network for this problem? Or even a government agency that can investigate why this occurs. Talk about identity theft...
Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel."
...considering you'd have to be a tit to opt for one over .com :)
[1] .xxx. This is the only case where it might be
beneficial provided that it is only given out for porno sites
(but of course I would really like to have a zorro.xxx domain!!).
However I strongly doubt that it would turn out overall useful. But at least in this case there some arguments supporting it.
Perhaps with the exception of
When you are sure of something, you probably are wrong (search for "Unskilled and Unaware of It").
Obviously it will take time to implement any comprehensive scheme that could achieve the critical mass and universal acceptance that any such system would need to actually be useful, but perhaps in time and with a new TLD or two, we can make it happen.
-Lod
In fact, "tel:", "fax:", and "modem:" URL schemes were proposed six(!) years ago by a Nokia researcher (RFC 2806), but no one seems to have paid them much mind.
Instead of www.domain.com let's use us.domain.com and eu.domain.com, etc and then break it down by state/province and then city
.com or whatever which would still be semantically correct but have them further identified by their region
.org (to avoid a new tld) not .com ie: us.washington.medina.bill.gates.org
.com should mean a commercial entity, .org should be a non-profit organization (whether a foundation or simply a family group or individual). Use prefixes to add organizational hierarchies... the most effective and least likely to be non-trivial being regional categories.
This would at least allow for several orders of differentiation.... we do it with phone numbers.. ie: prefixes instead of suffixes
This way you could have multiple companies/individuals, etc. as
You could register: us.va.richmond.shoegallery.com for a website/address for a business named Shoe Gallery in Richmond Virginia
Then someone else who had the bright idea of calling their business Shoe Gallery but was located across the country in Oregon could get us.oregon.portland.shoegallery.com
If the brand is a Registered Trademark in your state, you get to have us.oregon.shoegallery.com
If the brand is a Registered Trademark in the US, you get us.shoegallery.com
You could pay to receive a similar license for use in other countries if you had a presence there and did not conflict with an existing brand
The city level domain would be tied to the business address listed for billing purposes
This would allow non-national brands to co-exist in the same country under the same name (which is perfectly legal to do via DBA and business license per city), though you'd still have to respect Trademark laws ie: you couldn't claim us.ohio.bfe.sony.com just because there was no Sony store in your city.
This would also allow businesses to set up local storefronts more effectively, instead of having to ask for your zip code to determine your locality, then redirecting you... all sorts of interesting scenarios come up in fact.
Firstname.Lastname addresses could be organized more effectively.... though they should be
Notice the extra . between first and last... now Melinda can have her own address too.... and any other overshadowed Gates'ians in Medina, WA can have an address as well... though this still could be a problem for the many (Joe Kim)s in the various 'Korea Towns' but it's better odds than they have now.
And that's the whole point right... to give everyone a fair chance to have an address which is unique AND non-trivial
Without belaboring the point, there are better organizational methods than new suffixes... and in fact those should be reserved for functional purposes as they are now...
Using existing Trademark laws to enforce claims, existing franchises can be respected and yet a mom-and-pop can elect to go with an available local domain in the beginning and then escalate their claim as it becomes a regional brand and then a national brand without having to pay up front. The courts would decide who can claim a national Trademark in the event that two regional brands decided to go national at the same time or wanted to instituted their claim in advance against competing brands at the national level... most likely there would be a payoff/settlement and the business who wanted it the most, had the resources to follow through on their claim would get the name, though the business wanting the national brand would have a tough time if they only had one physical address, no matter how big their bank account is.
The biggest issue would be when a business or organization changes physical address.... they would also have to register a new virtual address, if you move out of your city, or your state... though not as big as you might think at first, no bigger than changing phone numbers or physical address really, simply notify interested parties of the new business web address or individual web address as you would for your street address. Certainly not as convenient as being lucky enough to get yourname.com and keep it forever, but who's that lucky anyways? and do they deserve to get all the glory?
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Why not put in place a system that uses both numbers and letters. For instance a country code before .tel to denote the country. Such as .us for United States, .uk for United Kingdom, .ca for Canada, etc. Then each member of the country can use a unique number such as their Social Security Number in the U.S. or their Social Insurance Number in Canada. Assuming each country has a unique identifier for each individual this should work perfectly.
For instance, mine would be 634812628.us.tel. That way, there would be no collisions.
Try as I might, I can't foresee any problems arising from this.
But wait. I want to hear about the country fan mail...!
Phishers of the world are behind you 100%.
A local politician and a convicted sex offender.
You laugh, but wouldn't it be better if there were someway to make keywords scalable, wouldn't it be superior to the current system? Do you really envision us using this same busted ass system in 10, 20, 30 years? Or do you still tweak your config.sys, because "GUI is for wimps"?
Which one of these would you propose organizations place in their advertisements? Is the identifier guaranteed to take the person to the company's home page, even if 99.9% of the people volunteering tags hate the company and desire to harm them? Is it memorable enough that someone can hear it on the radio and type it into their web browser an hour later? How do you keep people from naming their site with the name of another company, or another company's trade or service mark?
What trusted party would tag paypa1.com as paypal.com? If anything, the pages of phishers would quickly be tagged "phishers," "fraud," "danger," etc. Phishers already exist under the current system, so the question is if we can make a system that does better than the current system, not necessarily a perfect one.
That URL scheme already exists, and works perfectly if you have a softphone (such as Skype (ouch), or sjphone, xten or similar).
How about all domains for these ideas get a new TLD of .pointless?
It's already possible to find pretty much any company with a unique name via a google search. Unique names are already a requirement of domain name registration. So essentially, all that would be different is the power to name things would be devolved from ICANN to users more generally.
Excuse me, but while I agree with 92% of your examples,
www.eFax.com are spammers
Well, since the Content-Type meta tag already has a defined function, you might try to get your legislators to push for wider (or even ubiquitous) use of the "rating" tag, i.e.:
/>
<meta name="rating" content="general"
etc...
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr. Seuss
Only time will .tel!
No, we don't need a .tel TLD. Not now, not ever.
.eu. Big companies that have their trademarks registered get their domain names. But even a customer of mine, a 90-year old international transport company, does not have his name registered. Once the domains were fully available, the servers got overloaded, and most domains were taken by hijackers.
.info .eu etc were introduced, this did not change the number of visitors, but does increase costs. How many domains do we need to register to keep our (registered or unregistered) trademarks safe?
.xxx and .kids, both to protect the kids.
First, we've seen what happend to
Second, the more domains, the more costs. Once we had ourcompany.nl and ourcompany.com. When
The only new tld's I think we need the next decade, are
.sig: No such file or directory
But even Europeans have other naming conventions - Hispanic names typically have lots of family-name parts, so "José López Portillo y Pacheco" is López Portillo, not Pacheco. Icelanders retain the older Scandinavian naming customs that Leif Ericson is the son of Eric Whoeversson (I forget if it's strictly patronymic, so Helga Ericsdottir, or if women are named matronymically.) Russian names have the patronymic as a middle name. Irish and Scottish names have mostly abandoned the patronymic systems in favor of family-name surnames, so Ronald MacDonald would be from Clan MacDonald rather than the son of somebody named Donald, but I don't know that they've completely done that, and even then the Gaelic names are more likely to be uncooperative. For instance, the musician Aodh Og O'Tuama has a given name of Aodh Og. Multipart family names with place names in them are common in Germanic and Romance languages - "van der Waals" vs. "Vander Wal" vs. "vandergriff", "de la Cruz", etc. I'm not sure what Ithiel de Sola Pool's family name is - I think it's "de Sola Pool", but I've seen him referred to as just "Pool".
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
When I read the headline I thought this was going to be a way to make VoIP'ing as seamless as a regular phone call, too bad its just another lame TLD.
.tel TLD (say swanriversean.tel). .tel so that the traditional phone system can link in easily. ...
...
But imagine how interested I was when I thought they were going to do something like this:
1. I buy a
2. I get a hosting service that handles the trafic (this could be done by anyone, Skype, AT&T, MM&I (me, myself, and I), etc.).
3. Any VoIP user could call me using my domain name - it wouldn't matter what clients we use - the service providers could make sure it is properly briged (eventually, you would think, they'd all standardize on something).
4. This could be used for IM as well.
5. When you own a regular telephone or cellphone, you automatically get
6.
I'm still dreaming what a great service this could be!
Oh well, maybe I'll start a company
Does anyone want to pay me?
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr. Seus
In the Us, we find it hilarious, because .biz means SPAM.
I thought .biz meant spam (lowercase) and .hormel.com meant SPAM (uppercase).
Now all I need is to create a spider to crawl every .tel site and sell it to the highest bidding spyware/massmail/spam kings in town!
I guess figuring this out inside the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDDS (for *) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENUM (for just numbers) discussions wasn't overly complicated and political, so someone decided another (uselss) TLD war would distract people from implementation ;).
And this is any easier, how? You just went from having a central place (root DNS servers) to have a key pointer to an intense sounding bureaucracy. People hate to agree with each other on the internet.
_ idiotic_idea_that/reply sort of idea
I say it's about time we hide the implementation details, alright, but domain names are here to stay.
Just not urls like that. Personally, I'm a fan of http://slashdot.org/1742006_Is_It_Time_For_tel/An
These self-tagging schemes can't work for this very reason. What is "artistic" to the person generating the content may be shocking to some and perfectly fine to others. The net is global, so what they consider artistic in some parts of the world would be highly objectionable elsewhere. It's really not so simple as to allow your teenage child to see any "artistic" nudes--don't you think some site in some locality will display something highly objectionable in this category?
Further, I fear you're being quite naive to think that the person generating the content would be honest and objective. Consider all the battles films executives wage in order to get a coveted PG-13 rather than R rating, so that they can expand the potential audience. The same thing would hold for ad- or subscription-driven "artistic" content.
And as for legislation, no thanks. The best thing our elected representatives can do in this respect is keep their noses out of our business. Would you propose that every image, sound, text, or other content be subject to mandatory review? That's what the film-makers do, but it just doesn't scale to this vast medium called the Internet. Even if it did, there's no universal agreement, so again, these ratings are nearly worthless except at a very granular level.
Even if you start from the other end, and tag kid-friendly content (consider the ".kids" TLD) you can bet that some communities around the world will think nearly any nudity is fine whereas even cartoon-like violence would be objectionable (and, of course vice versa in other parts of the world)
I don't have any good solution to this problem, and I would suggest that, unfortunately, neither do you.
There should be a .luser TLD just for people like you!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I don't see how it could be otherwise.
First, the phone company already knows that the best way to index phone number is by soundex, to avoid massive problems caused by the fact that many people don't know the correct spellings of their friends' and associates' names. And they certainly aren't sounding like this will be the first domain indexed by soundex.
Second, it's unlikely that domain ownership will be a prerequisite to having a phone number. I don't think they could sell that. (In fact, they might realistically make more by saying they were going to give away the domain with your name and invent a service called ... hmmm, let's see... how about the "unlisted domain" where the customer pays money to keep from being locatable.)
Third, phone numbers have the virtue of being uncorrelated with a name. That's what makes them resolvable in ambiguity--they act as a cross-check to make sure you got it right. When you can't quite remember a number and think it's either 555-1234 or 555-1235 and then check information to find the first is for "Sam Smith" and the second for "Alex Jones", there's little doubt how to resolve things. But if you thought the number was 1387.Sam.Smith.com or 1386.Sam.Smith.com or maybe 1387.Samuel.Smith.com or maybe 1386.Samuel.Smith or 1387.Sam.Smythe.com or... Obviously finding out that the mis-remembered number matches a lot of same-named people won't help at all. (If you believe in correlating names with telephones this way, it's a short conceptual hop to believing that a .pw domain would help you remember your password.)
If you can't autogenerate good phone numbers (i.e., tell people what name they're supposed to use), as I and many others here have argued you can't, what's the alternative? Allow people to choose? Gads, with all the domain squatting it's clear that this would allow much choice to a rich few and little choice to most people. And so it would not be fair at all. The fairest thing I can imagine is to not involve ICANN at all.
And besides, back to the original point about this being a ploy to sell domain registries, if I wanted to have the domain system already remember my phone number, why wouldn't I just have people do nslookup on the names I already own? They already require domain owners to list their phone numbers.
Kent M Pitman
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer
Next question please.
Remember, there is much more to the Internet than port 80! What if someone wants to send e-mail to McDonald's? Or if Mr. McDonald wants to configure SSH for his farm? A system based on HTML meta tags or disambiguation web pages sure won't help.
We can map the human genome to DNS and give every base pair its own domain name. Then, when we want to find a cure to disease, you can just type it into your browser.
Edith Keeler Must Die
How much would I be sued for?
This space available.
We need another TLD like we need another hole in the head.
.com/.net/.gov/.edu/country-domains. Probably not even .org which seems to be used much like another .com (No offense Slashdot :-)
.com.
.com landrush is over. Get over it ICANN. Do something useless for us with your 25c domain name tax instead. I for one haven't seen 25c worth of work from you.
Just ICANN trolling for money.
Is anyone other than a squatter going to buy these things. Is FredsGlassware.com going to bother getting FredsGlassware.eu, FredsGlassware.tel, and FredsGlassware.every damned country TLD? No. He'll get
The
There exists already an experimental numerical, IP-based numbering/directory system which has more promise (IMHO) than a new top level domain. Check out http://www.freenum.org/ - there are about 100 organizations that have numbers in the range and who are actively using the system, such as MIT, Internet2, Columbia, Free World Dialup, and many more.
.tel hierarchy defeats the purpose of NAPTR and SRV records. Use your existing domain name if you or your interested dialers have the ability! ISN is only a stopgap for devices which are number-pad constrained (telephone handsets.) Creating a catch-all for telephony domain names seems like we're going in the wrong direction. Everyone has an email address, right? So if the assumption is that the "dialing party" has the ability to enter in some type of domain name, then why aren't we using the email address of the recipient to "dial" a number? This whole .tel suffix is counter-intutive - perhaps someone can explain it better to me in a way that doesn't involve how the explainer can reap a profit by being a domain registrar.
ISN (ITAD Subscriber Number) endpoint identification avoids namespace conflicts by using unique numeric suffixes for firms, much like domain names. These are allocated by IANA at the moment. An example ISN would be "1234*256" which would translate via an ENUM-like method into extension 1234 at organization 256, which evaluates into "sip:1234@204.91.156.10" but could also contain instant messaging NAPTRs, E.164 endpoints (fully qualified telephone numbers), email addresses, etc.
Creating a
You have just described REST my friend.
.mil or .gov), but I think they would be much better of if they were dropped too. (then you just use mil.country or gov.country). Instead of slashdot.org, just use slashdot.
I wish so very much that the web worked like this, but it doesn't, and for the most part won't for a long time. Personally I think HTTP is actually a decent protocol, but it still has some serious confusion involved. The biggest problem of course, are all those code monkeys who don't know what their doing.
As far as ifl is conserned it has some serious problems associated with it. Sure it would work ok for sites like slashdot and google that have a large user base, it doesn't work well for small things at all.
For example, what if I set up my own website and I start using the tag foobar. I put my resume on there at ifl:foobar/resume and I tell a potential employer they can get it there. However, during the time of my interview, someone else (lets say Jeff K.) wants to use the domain so he and all his friends start to associate his site with the foobar keyword. And my interveiwer goes to get my resume, and he finds some other kids webpage instead.
While the current DNS system isn't that great, it has integrity, which is very important in a naming/uri system (see http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html). Why is it important? Well think of all of the confusion you would have if everyone in your office traded names for a day.
personally, I would like to see the tld system dropped. I don't really see any purpose in it. There are a few tlds that have use (like
While I agree with this in theory. I have a few remarks.
That said, PICS is not a complete failiure, and it's much better than nothing.
I'd much prefer some sort of searchable online database provided by google, that way my gmail account can link straight to it, and name space collision will not be an issue.
Google could put text ads down the side too, so everyone would be happy.
The United Nations
The European Union
NATO
Interpol
World Health Organization
International Civil Aviation Organization
The International Telecommunications Union
The Red Cross
I don't know what to say about this one though:
International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR)
And more: Google it
Not to mention the sloppy rules for registration:
Just look at that! Sheesh. No fee? No wonder all the spam comes fromTouche'.
This is a very bad idea.
Ugh! Telemarketers. What I don't understand is why the namespace has to be forced into specific top levels. Why can't we map any word or words to an IP address? Why is it that the system can't be set up to allow something like bandmassa.music (subject to the user being the first to register it, of course) to take the user to what is currently registered as http://www.bandmassa.com/ Or why not anyword.anyword or anyword.anyword.anyword etc? Subject to the desired term not already being registered, of course.
"I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for, er... food." Col. Jack O'Neil, SG-1
While I welcome anyone who can get a TLD through ICANN (mind you more as proof for my assertion that unlimited tld's would not hurt the precious "infrastructure" in any way and that the whole TLD "rationing" thing is a conspiracy to control the price of domain names which should realistically be as close to $0.00 as possible, but I digress), this idea doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
.dir that they wanted awhile back. Then everyone who owns a domain will (as I recall) get a shadow domain name of domain.tld.dir so that you would have company.com and get company.com.dir for free, and it would be the public space to access your directory (to whatever degree you wanted to share, or a pointer to the directory or whatever.) and apps and people would always know where to look.
If you think through the plan for this domain, why would you want to limit it to just phone numbers? What about IM names? What about e-mail addresses? Physical addresses? etc.
Isn't this just a silly way to implement a directory service (al biet not a very user friendly one)?
Didn't we already go down this route with the ITU years ago and get X.500 and ultimately LDAP (and happily OpenLDAP)?
Maybe it is time to give Novell the