ICANN Board Approves Wide Expansion of TLDs

penciling_in writes "The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has approved the relaxation of the rules for the introduction of new Top-Level Domains — a move that could drastically change the Internet. 'We are opening up a new world and I think this cannot be underestimated,' said Roberto Gaetano, an ICANN board member. The future outcome of this decision was discussed on Slashdot a few days ago. It also seems, based on this post on CircleID from last month, that ICANN was already in preparation mode of mass TLD introductions. The new decision will allow companies to register their brands as generic top-level domain names (TLDs). For instance, Microsoft could apply to have a TLD such as '.msn', Apple apply for '.mac', and Google for '.goog'... The decision was taken unanimously on Thursday, June 26, 2008 at the 32nd ICANN Meeting in Paris."

Comments

There will be some good from this.

[Gewalt]

We are long overdue for a .sucks domain. It will be nice to finally have it.

Re:There will be some good from this.

[lastchance_000]

You'll have to talk to Hoover to register domains under it, though.

Re:There will be some good from this.

[ShieldW0lf]

Talk about printing your own money.

This is like paying the city to give your driveway a name, so you can brag about what a blue blood you are for having your own street.

Re:There will be some good from this.

[TeknoHog]

You'll have to talk to Hoover to register domains under it, though.

Dam!

Re:There will be some good from this.

[whackco]

I am more interested in seeing a list of the immediatly blocked list.

One thing they would want to block is the .local - this is very common in Active Directory structures to differentiate the LAN/WAN environments.

Imagine if some company bought the .local and started to be able to randomly answer requests from around the world of millions of potential queries?

This brings up a good point, if you want to look at where this can be exploited, simply look at the dropped and invalid query records of the current root servers. I just hope they have some common sense... oh wait...

Re:There will be some good from this.

[Gewalt]

100K$ - 500K$... Not to mention you have to provide a "business model" and um... show technical capacity to run a TLD. Which makes this more of a money grab before the rest of the world wrests control of the net from ICANN.

Re:There will be some good from this.

[tverbeek]

ICANN has .cheezburger?

first.post

[Anonymous Coward]

fuck.icann

Re:first.post

[dotancohen]

icann.not

The end of ctrl+enter days?

[pwnies]

I sincerely hope that this doesn't become too commonplace, and that .com, .net, and .org don't just get thrown out the window. Call me lazy, but I love being able to ctrl+enter, shift+enter, and ctrl+shift+enter to auto-complete .com/.net/.org respectively. Typing "www.search.google" is just more tedious than typing, "google [ctrl][enter]"

Re:The end of ctrl+enter days?

[Gewalt]

Take a lesson from the idiots. Many times I have seen /.r's mocking end users for using the search feature on their homepage to get to another website, instead of using the address bar. I don't find that feature idiotic at all, and I use that behavior myself. The more and more TLDs we get, the more convenient this "feature" of a modern homepage becomes. And don't moan about have to use the mouse to click the first entry, most users would have had to use the mouse to even put the cursor in the address bar anyways, not to mention click the mouse a predetermined number of times between 1 and 3 just to be able to start tying a random URL.

Re:The end of ctrl+enter days?

[BungaDunga]

Couldn't there be www.google? ie, domain "www" TLD "google".

Re:The end of ctrl+enter days?

[CastrTroy]

I've completely disabled history in my browser. I've never really seen a use for it. The majority of sites don't even have good titles. Not only that, but there's no really good way of finding stuff in the history. By the end of the day, it's impossible to find any one page your viewed throughout the day. Worked fine in the day of 28.8 K modems, where you only visited 20 pages a day. I think that the history should be tree based. Each time you open a new empty tab, do a new search, or type in a URL directly, it should start a new tree. The pages you visit form that point on should be under that tree. If from the same page, I open 6 different links, they should all show up as direct children of that first entry. So, you could do a search in google, and each of the six items opened from the search results will result in a child of that initial search.

Re:The end of ctrl+enter days?

[olyar]

Not at work. Just checked. You were wise not to go there...

Re:The end of ctrl+enter days?

[prod-you]

You obviously haven't used Firefox 3 yet.

Interesting reversal

[damn_registrars]

It wasn't that long ago that ICANN voted against allowing the much-requested .xxx domain. Now they want to open up to allow custom TLDs?

As if the internet didn't have enough arbitrary hodge-podge already.

Re:Interesting reversal

[pitchpipe]

I say make 'em type in the ip address. That'll get rid of that hodge-podge lickety split. Now get off my lawn!

Re:Interesting reversal

[jandrese]

No, it was just the creation of a .xxx domain, there was never any realistic talk about forcing all pornographic material on there (defining what is pornographic for the entire world would be impossible anyway). It was going to be completely self selected. The reason they didn't want to make it is because they didn't want to create a "red light" district on the internet, an idea I still find baffling given the current nature of the internet.

Re:Interesting reversal

[Caldrak]

They feared the study that shows that 90% of all traffic that's not torrents relating to copyrighted material points to the red light district.

Slashdot can finally be what it wants

[aster_ken]

http://slashdot.dot/

Woohoo!

Re:Slashdot can finally be what it wants

[Eudial]

http://slashdot.dot/

Woohoo!

H t t p colon slash slash slash dot dot dot...?

Hm. You could develop this into some sort of morse code.

So, since geek.com is already registered, we can register --. . . -.-, or

http://dotdotdotslash.slash/

Followed by

2. ???

And

3. Profit!

Re:Slashdot can finally be what it wants

[masterzora]

But http://slashdot.dot/ leads to an equal number of slashes and dots (not to mention maximizing the number of slashes and dots with out making the URL tedious). Surely this is a good thing?

Those're gonna be some fun router tables

[wiredog]

I, personally, intend to try for the ".nsfw" domain.

Re:Those're gonna be some fun router tables

[DarthBart]

I don't know about you, but none of my router tables have DNS names in them.

So wait....

[porcupine8]

Let's say Apple registers .apple or .ipod. Do they automatically get ALL of the possible domains within that TLD? If not, who controls the TLD? If .apple is a TLD, can I go to GoDaddy and register porcupine.apple? If they do control it, do they have to pay to register domains within their own TLD? Or does this deal come with free unlimited domains?

Re:So wait....

[Gewalt]

If they register the TLD then they will become the registrar. If you want to get a domain on that TLD then you will have to go through them.

Re:So wait....

[gclef]

Close. They will become the registRY. The registRAR must be one of the ICANN-approved ones (you can't require a non-ICANN registrar). It isn't clear from what I've read whether you can refuse to work with any registrar and make it a closed TLD. I would assume you can, though.

Clownpenis.fart

[the_tsi]

No longer the last domain available.

Abuse of TLDs

[JoeCommodore]

I hope they have good oversight...

Imagine the chaos of tlds with: .exe .dll .prg .php .c0m (or other foreign symbol for o .txt .pdf .conf .doc .txt .xls .ppt .jpg .gif .tif .mp3 .mpg .htm(l) .png ...then again slashdot could have a slashdot.slashdot domain.

Re:Abuse of TLDs

[Amouth]

persontal i want to try and get .local

just so i can fuck with all the small biz NT/AD domain installs out there that doen't use a fully qualified name

as soon as .local is resolvable soooo many people are going to have a bad day

Why not just languages?

[fintler]

I'd be happy with a TLD system based on language. Why do we need the com/net/org thing anyway. Lets just have something like

http://google.en/
http://google.it/
http://.name.language/

Re:Why not just languages?

[tppublic]

"Lets just have something like http://google.en/"

I think you mean: http://google.en_us/

Woohoo

[Colin Smith]

A flat DNS. Just the way it was always meant to be.

 

Possibly the stupidest idea ever

[lusiphur69]

Hmmm..let's open up the TLD's so that DNS servers will become overcrowded with useless DNS information that will quickly go out of date and throw the usability and simplicity of the current schema right out the window.

Additionally, of course, common folk will have more trouble getting a domain name for that personal website/application because the fees are going to increase exponetially.

Cash-in for ICANN - and end users lose.

God help us

[nurb432]

This will only cause more confusion, especially to the average person.

But they get more $ out of the extra registrations, so we know why it *really* happened.

So if McDonald's wanted a TLD...

[oodaloop]

...then ICANN has .chzbrgr?

I'm sorry, I'll show myself out now.

Re:So if McDonald's wanted a TLD...

[thermian]

that's it, you're banned from the internet..

I can think of many companies

[LM741N]

that should be restricted to the .con domain.

Re:I can think of many companies

[legoman666]

.kaaahhhnnnnn ?

Oh no...

[drspliff]

From a technical point of view I see this as a failure. It's putting more weight on on the root name servers, how long until there are 10,000 TLDs, 100,000 of them? a million? Then there's all the people running the TLDs who may or may not have the infrastructure, technical expertise or long-term stability to properly run one.

"free market" != stable, there will be thousands of different ways to register sub-domains, some where registrations will not be allowed, some which cost excessive amounts of money and eventually whole TLDs setup to Google-bomb.

Sure it means people will be able to type in "apple", but what gives one specific company the right over a global use of that trademark name? What about "apple" print design services, "apple" car mechanics all of whom have their own trademarks in that industry.

I'm just an idealist, and would much prefer ".uk.org.mycompany.www" style domains (remember, thats how it was supposed to work in the beginning but somebody fucked up), but all I can see happening from opening up TLDs is annoyance and instability.

I'm not even going to comment on ICANN doing this for the money, capitalist pigs.

I like the idea, frankly

[Luyseyal]

I don't care if it makes the Internet work like AOL keywords. I don't care if Google, Yahoo!, et al. have to spider inf() more TLDs. I don't care if idiot corporations think they have to buy every version of .m1kr0s0ft and .msf7 out there "just in case". If we can finally get .fuck and .suck, .lol and .is.gay the Internet will finally release its full scientific potential.

More porn.
-l

P.s., Karl Auerbach did experiments showing even BIND could handle umpteen million TLDs.

in many ways, this is good

[eobanb]

If you read TFA you'll see that the TLDs will cost upwards of $100,000 and are subject to ICANN approval. That cost and/or approval might be a one time thing, or it might turn out to be annual. Yes, there will be a few idiotic TLDs, but this is probably how it should've been from the beginning. I work for a university IT department and we regularly get calls from users trying to access university sites (most of which use the .edu TLD of course), except that they are trying to use .com instead. Some universities have registered .com domains to redirect to the real site to try and accommodate these people. Our department refuses to do this, and I'm glad. Many people still have the mindset that website == ends in .com and it reinforces that notion. Arbitrary TLDs will slowly change the mindset from thinking that a URL is anything.usually-com to anything.anything. This is probably how DNS should have been from the beginning.

Re:more cyber-squatting?

[digitally404]

For now it shant be a problem especially if the new names are expected to cost over $100,000.

Re:I just can't wait

[jmac1492]

I want http://www.com.dyslexia/

In case anyone wants any facts

[geekoid]

http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-4-26jun08-en.htm

Back to the future

[Todd Knarr]

And so it comes full circle. The ancient flat hosts file that the ARPAnet used way back in it's early days, the one that was abandoned in favor of hierarchical DNS because it wasn't possible to manage a flat namespace when the net was a few thousand machines, returns. What, you think the companies that insist on registering every variation of their name in every domain in existence won't insist on having their own TLD too? And we'll be back to hostnames being of the form "ford". And "fordfocus". And "focus". And "myfocus". And "myford". All belonging to Ford Motors. And the inevitable fights when Focus Magazine (a fine-art photography magazine) also wants "focus" and has the trademark to justify getting it just as much as Ford.

Siiiiiigh...

This is stupid - here is the solution:*

[I Want to be Anonymo]

A meeting of the minds between Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft resulting in an agreement to not index these idiotic domains could kill this quick before it gets out of hand.

*Will it happen - doubtful.
  Can you or I do anything about it - probably not.
  But I can dream.

Won't this eventually end up like usenet?

[oldspewey]

You know, with all kinds of domain names like:

alt.binaries.go.pound.sand.up.your.ass
comp.sys.obscure.programming.language.that.only.six.remaining.bearded.men.even.remember
can.forsale.illegal.bootleg.dvds.buffy.vampire.slayer

The rich take all?

[Excelcia]

The problem I have is with the dispute resolution system. According to Paul Twomey of ICANN (as quoted by the BBC), "[i]f there is a dispute, we will try and get the parties together to work it out. But if that fails there will be an auction and the domain will go to the highest bidder."

So, I pick a name, and McDeepPockets comes along and thinks, hey, that's a great idea - I'll just take that, thank-you. They "dispute" it, and ICANN's response is... well, if you really can't settle your differences, high bidder gets it. Wow... that's going to make for a pretty mercenary internet.

Problems

[Pig Hogger]

Ther will be some problems... If you look in the release,

4. How will offensive names be prevented?

Offensive names will be subject to an objection-based process based on public morality and order. This process will be conducted by an international arbitration body utilizing criteria drawing on provisions in a number of international treaties. ICANN will not be the decision maker on these objections.

This will obviously not work.

One innocent word in a language can be an offensive word in another. For exemple, the french word for "seal" is phoque, which is pronounced exactly like you think it is.

And even in the same language, various countries will give totally different meanings to a given word. Think of "lift" -vs- "elevator", "boot" -vs- "trunk" or "crisps" -vs- "chips"...

And it can be even worse; for example, in France, gosses means "children", whereas in Québec, it means "testicles".

Re:Problems

[Just some bastard]

And it can be even worse; for example, in France, gosses means "children", whereas in Québec, it means "testicles".

Won't somebody think of the testicles?

Re:http://[2001:0db8:85a3:08d3:1319:8a2e:0370:7348

[Jester998]

Is that your web site on this business card, or a PGP signature? :)