Slashdot Mirror
First New Generic Top Level Domains Opening
umdenken points out that the first batch of generic Top Level Domains will go live within the next several days, including .bike, .guru, .clothing, .holdings, .singles, .plumbing, and .ventures. (Early access began Jan. 29th.) ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade says there is currently huge demand for ICANN to reopen their program to let companies run their own gTLD. He said, "Many, many brands and many, many communities didn't know about the GTLD program. I get significant amounts of questions about when can we open the next round, because certainly there is a bit of angst that if Canon [who applied for the .canon gTLD] uses this to do an incredible mass customization campaign to win users to their product, I'm sure the brand next to them will say "Why aren't we doing this?" So I do believe this will snowball. But many will find a .com or whatever they have now will be good enough, and I believe that one excludes the other." He also said the $185,000 price tag to do so is likely to drop.
This is a terrible idea for the internet but a great idea for the businesses (eg. custom marketing like the summary mentions) and ICANN (because who wouldn't love large wads of cash!)
Can anyone give a few points on how this is good for the general internet user?
captcha: complete
Nobody knew about GTLD? Perhaps that's because .bike isn't really "generic", is it? And it's pretty Anglo-centric too.
After the USA invented the Internet it administered the TLDs until 1998 or so, when ICANN took over.
Having an international organization that holds meetings around the world must be better than letting the bad old American government run things, right. How boring and uncreative it would've been to be stuck with dot-com, dot-org, dot-net, dot-edu, and the country-specific TLDs.
why do we even have .com or .org or .net on the end. Surely the classification of organization at a address can be stored in some other way, and not be so important as to need to be typed in every time you go to that url. I mean, why cant i just type 'slashdot' in the address bar. Damn near everyone defaults to .com anyway.
Oh joy. I can just hardly wait for the race to get .obama, .clinton, .christie, .huckabee, etc.
What a wonderful advance for the intarwebs...
(sarcasm warning for the insight impaired)
$185,000 is Raqueteering.
why do we even have .com or .org or .net on the end.
To identify which registration authority the domain name was created under.
Also... to distinguish domain names from just any other name.
I'll give you an example: "BOOKS"
No one entity should get a monopoly on the name BOOKS. If you type BOOKS into your browser address bar; you should not be summarily redirected to whoever happened to get there first ---- logically, you would be presented search results based on relevance.
The authority system allows, there to be a BOOKS.COM under the Commercial registration authority... that might be a book store, Or an accounting vendor....
There can be a BOOKS.ORG, under the non-profit organization reg. authority ---- that might, for example, be a library-related organization.
Then there can be a BOOKS.EDU under the education reg. authority --- that domain might, for example, be an institution of higher learning that specializes in the library sciences or authorship/book writing.
Such domains a .INFO; were added later, and Don't really fit logically in the original DNS system.
Domain peddlers are going bonkers now, I tried to get my name as a .guru, but it ended up costing a small fortune...so I steered away. At first...40 bucks seems nice for a 1 year .guru name, but then there are "early registration fees" so called landrush fees that can cost several thousand dollars, and they even have hefty admin fees that costs several hundred dollars...stay away from the scammers, and they're plentiful right now.
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
With all the AJAX crap going on web browsers, why not go full circus also with the domain names while we are at it.
I have as much trust in a random TLD as a site in the .cx TLD; and plan to just block/ignore addresses from them.
No one entity should get a monopoly on the name BOOKS.
If all TLDs were random six letter combinations, or local geographic regions, I'd see your point, but with the TLDs we have now, using your logic, ONE books.edu for all institutions of higher learning in the world is about as dumb as one books.
Either make a lot more of them, or get rid of them... doing nothing isn't solving your problem.
That's the idea, anyway. In practice .com became such a buzzword everyone wanted one.
I think I'd prefer (there are probably issues that haven't occurred to me) if there were no generic top-level domains at all, only country codes. I realize why they exist, I just find them redundant and also slightly confusing especially outside the US; .com/.net/.org and several others are world-wide but .edu/.mil/.gov are US-only AFAIK. The distinction between .com, .net, and .org doesn't seem very clear either, if there even is one nowadays apart from aesthetics.
On the other hand, the current system works Good Enough so it probably won't and maybe shouldn't change.
.. maybe it would be fairest to just cancel this whole private gTLD expansion lunacy?
It will. The business approach is obvious: First you set the price ridiculously high, to extract as much money as possible from those who must have their domain at any cost - businesses with trademarks to protect, mostly. But there are only so many of those, so once sales dry up you gradually lower the price to broaden the market. That way everyone pays exactly as much as they can be made to pay, maximising revenue.
how about we just drop the farse that are TLDs? the only TLDs with any credability are .gov and .edu because those are regulated. all the other TLDs are just one big bag of everything else. nobody wants to get a .net if .com is taken because of the confusion that ensues.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
A few years ago a bunch of people from Sweden announced they would create a distributed, non-trackeable DNS system. What happened to that?
.bs
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
The way I see it, .com is the generic domain. It's not that hard to append it to everything. The only useful other domains are .edu and .gov. The national domains are somewhat useful because they let you know it's a local site, although I don't understand why they need it, really, they should just use .com also.
Here in Australia, we have regulations (socialism!) that require anyone registering a .com.au domain to have some connection to the name in their registered business eg if I want to register bike.com.au, my business needs to have demonstrable connection to the bike business somehow. Sure some trash slips through the cracks, but on the whole works well to keep .com.au domains relatively reliable.
Not sure why more registrars don't enforce similar requirements.
Meh. It's not like most people pay attention to the domains. They just go to their search engine of choice and type-in "Canon" (or whatever they happen to be looking for) and if they can be bothered they look for the most useful result or just click on the first one if they can't.
Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.
www.bike.com www.bike/com And he will live in nigeria
Welcome to the end of a meaningful domain name system.
Yeah, I know they tried raping it before, but the world largely ignored .biz, .info, .aero and I even forgot what the others were. Or have you seen more than two domains in those TLDs in the recent years?
But brands, that was a gold mine. Advertisers are parasites and they will be happy to convince their marks^H^H^Hcustomers that they really, absolutely must have a fitting TLD now. And since in large corporations (that have the money), the people they talk to are also marketing dudes, it'll work.
It's a huge scam, but it'll rape the usefulness of the DNS hierarchy. Too bad we didn't put everyone within ICANN to the sword while there was still time.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Probably some bank.
Why go for the example 'books'. Why not other common names like 'windows' or 'apple'.
I still ask why there were .com, .net and .org. I will elaborate a bit more. Why aere ther .com, .net and .org next to the country codes?
It would have been better (hindsight is always 20/20) to just have gone with the country codes. That way each country would have been able to do whatever they please to do. Do you want to give nobody a domain? Good for you. Do you want to limit id to just your citizens or just businesses or to everybody who pays you? Great.
The argument against this is often what about things like linux.org or similar things. When I look at the whois data, I see a US addrss, so it would have been linux.us or even linux.org.us or linux.inc.us or whatever they want to come up with.
And while I am at it, the order of the domain should have been reversed. So instead of e.g. tech.slashdot.org.us, It would have been better to go for us.org.slashdot.tech as you then follow the tree. Even neater if there would have been no dots, but slashes instead:
http://us/org/slashdot/tech//directory/subdirectory/file.html (Please note the second double slashes to show where the domain ends and the file system begins.
Anyway, we can contemplate on what could have been, but now we have this mess and it will have to do.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
How come the plumbers got a guernsey and all the other trades missed out, sure smells funny to me.
I don't think monks living in caves on himalayan mountains need their own TLD
Its amazing how language evolves
I remeber when guru was short for "Guru Meditation Number"
In the early day of internet research, they wanted to distinguish between corporations there to make a profit, non-profit organisations, educational groups and the military. So they had ".com" = corporations/companies, ".org" = non-profit organisation, and ".edu" for the educational research groups, ".mil" for the military", and ".net" for the companies that managed the continent wide networks built from fibre-optics and satellite communications.
That gets extended to giving each country it's own domain ".uk" = UK, ".fr" = France, ".de" = Germany. It was a sense of achievement for any country to get their own top-level domain.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
So no we have come full circle, where other entities like companies also can have that sense of achievement of having their own TLD, without much practical value besides generating cash for ICANN. ;-)
I think that the fact that you had to point out the double slashes shows why replacing the dots with slashes is a bad idea.
Why is linux _.us_, you chauvinist clod? It's international!
What if the current guys get weary of supporting it and pass it to Mark Shuttleworth, do we have to rewrite every page referring to it to point to http://za/org/linux?
Or do we leave it where it were - and so just bunch all domains under coutries where registrars are incorporated?
It's all solving a wrong problem. The problem is you can't describe a site with a single simple category.
I've got a bike touring site, it's a hobby site, so I think I'll put it in .org... Wait, I might go commercial later, publish news and ads, do bike reviews and all that, do I put in .com too? Oh, they've got specific TLDs, do I put it in .bike or in .travel? Ooooh, and I'll add a forum and match-making for bike trips, may be I'll go for .social...
That's why Google, or Bing, or Yandex, is the actual "domain name system" since ever. You could just throw it all away and leave only IP addressing (ok, with a bit of precaution for shared hosts), because even to visit FB people now just type "facebook" into search bar and click the first link.
.slash .dot .www
www.doubleu.dot
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
What about a top level domain .corn? Of course only to be used for things related to agrarian products. ;-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
And while I am at it, the order of the domain should have been reversed. So instead of e.g. tech.slashdot.org.us, It would have been better to go for us.org.slashdot.tech as you then follow the tree. Even neater if there would have been no dots, but slashes instead:
http://us/org/slashdot/tech//d... (Please note the second double slashes to show where the domain ends and the file system begins.
Actually in the 80s that is pretty much how it was.
UUCP mail was routed from one mail server to another to another before finally (hopefully!) landing in a users mail spool on a server they frequently checked more than others. This one done with whats called "bang paths" as they used ! as the separator, and the route was listed left to right ending with a double colon and the username.
Even at the time DNS replaced hosts.txt on the ARPAnet, there were still other connected networks like BITnet and CSnet using different protocols that used mixed forms of routing paths, and neither network required NSF approval to join like the ARPAnet did.
BITnet was IBMs VMS network, and anyone that had a VAX with the RSCS software installed and could afford a leased line was able to get on the network and get data to/from the arpanet.
There was a serious perceived threat from these other protocols, most of which lacked a unified or centrally managed naming lookup scheme (although that is exactly what RSCS was, although only for VAX)
At the time each protocol pretty much only looked out for their own, except for DNS which was advertized as "generic" and "non-proprietary" as only IP was required. DNS was also an open standard like IP and TCP. That was enough for DNS to "win" and become the one true naming system.
I'm not sure why they decided to use a right to left hierarchy beyond just trying to differentiate themselves from existing protocols...
But it doesn't follow the URL/URI standard because that wasn't to be invented for another 10 years or so.
As you say, hindsight is always 20/20
Only computer geeks like us actually enter domain names into a browser these days. Google and then scan codes have made the domain names mostly irrelevant.
So they had ".com" = corporations/companies, ".org" = non-profit organisation, and ".edu" for the educational research groups, ".mil" for the military", and ".net" for the companies that managed the continent wide networks built from fibre-optics and satellite communications.
.com is derived from the word "commerical" which includes but is not limited to corporations and companies.
Back in 1985 when .net was created I don't think there was "continent wide networks built from fibre-optics". .net was intended for network technology companies, ISPs (local, national and international) and infrastructure companies. Although, no restrictions were put on it's use so it has become a general purpose name.
Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
All this does is confuse matters even further and create a total cluster-F.
There should be a limited number of TLDs, and be 'regulated' like they used to be ( such as no commercial entities on an .org ).
---- Booth was a patriot ----
You clearly don't have a clue on is going on here. Time to turn in your geek card ( which i suspect is forged anyway ) and get off the net.
People like you only clutter things up for the rest of us.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
We could just move .gov to .com.
Domain Squatters, start your engines.
Many organizations will be caught off guard by this and have their names grabbed under the new TLDs. On the bright side, this will temporarily give us a chance to grab decent names instead of paying a squatter. It also drops the value of their holdings.
Aside from that, looking at the list, I think some of these should have also had abbreviations. .software, .engineer and .attorney look nice, but I would immediately want a shortened version as well.
I hereby register
obscurespecializeddomain.dreamedupbymarketingidiots.thatnoonewillevervisit.com
Copyright pending.
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
well, that's .stupid
Not outside of America - you must be channeling Team America world police :-)
www.sarcasm.excessivelylongtopleveldomainnoonewilltypeout
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
they are not the global tlds are above the country codes
If you think that's bad, take a look at this article, and especially the picture therein (though the article is funny as well if you ask me). No, that's not photoshopped, that's the actual city limits sign of the town.
The additional sign says "Please! Not so fast!", and is a sign put up at many city limits signs, supposed to convince drivers to slow down, but in this context it's just ... erh... wrong.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
As everyone knows, there was and is no actual need for these TLDs. Just like there was no need for .xxx. Just like there was no need for .mobi. Just like there was no need for .info.
The entire process is driven NOT by the communal needs of the Internet, but by ICANN,
which is now completely controlled by registrars -- registrars who are always looking for
new/expanded revenue streams.
There WAS a time, as I'm sure some folks will remember, that "one entity-one domain" was the rule. That time is long gone, as it drastically restricts registrar profits. Now? It's not uncommon for single entities to control hundreds to hundreds of thousands of domains. I've been researching this issue, and have looked at about 60M domains so far: EASILY 90% of them are crap. They're owned by speculators, typosquatters, "landing page" operators, clickthrough scammers, and on and on and on. I suspect that as I expand my work, that percentage won't change much. In other words: we could delete 90% of the domains out there with no appreciable effect on the Internet.
This latest expansion is merely an attempt to continue the same game -- but with outrageously prices and profits.
Here is my recommendation: learn how to use DNS RPZ. As each one of these TLDs is introduced, add it to the list so that you effectively make it disappear from your view of the Internet. Encourage others to do the same. After all, you aren't required to resolve any domain or group of domains -- so don't. If enough of us do this, we will make these domains essentially worthless. (Why? Because without DNS resolution in place, end users won't be able to reach them with web browsers. MTAs that check for domain existence -- which they should -- will reject all mail to/from them. And so on.)
The Internet doesn't need this junk. YOU don't need this junk. So make it vanish.
As you say, hindsight is always 20/20
Or 20!20.
I'd like to register .ing, then I could use it with every verb in the English language! run.ing! ski.ing! danc.ing! fuc... er you get the point.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
I would prefer no extensions whatsoever, not country codes, not setup types (like com, net, org). Just the actual domain name itself, perhaps prefaced with just "www.".
That would make for a far more unified and consistent system, as then each website owner can put whatever they want in that name, including dots and dashes if they so wish.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
Who on God's green earth benefits from this, besides those who sell domain names?
It wouldn't be difficult to devise a browser extension that would make the translation from http://www.x.y/zzzzz to http:y/x/www/zzzzz on the fly and vice-versa.
Then it's just a simple matter of getting the new format to catch on. ;)
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
More like if you had anything of the slightest value under a non-".com" domain the equivalent ".com" domain will be registered for ad squatting and/or to get a payout from you. They're not meaningful either, last I checked slashdot for example is not a non-profit, it's owned by a quite regular for-profit holding company so why is is NOT slashdot.com? And I never know what ".net" was supposed to be, I mean I can't even tell without looking up some sort of definition and even that one is vague as fsck "organizations involved in networking technologies, such as Internet service providers and other infrastructure companies." wouldn't 99.9% of these also be a ".com" (or ".org" in case of a municipal non-profit) so it's more like a weak tag?
It never made much sense to me, all the contrived examples on how this would solve namespace collisions are more easily solved by unique domain names. Apple Records? applerecords.com. If they're truly non-competing well then it'd be obvious to anyone that apple.com is not the record label and applerecords.com not the iDevice manufacturer. If Apple Records wanted it badly enough they could buy "apple.com" and Apple could move to "applecomputers.com" or whatever. It's not a problem in links. It's not a problem in written materials. It's not a problem using search engines. It's only a problem if you're trying to guess the right domain name from the company/organization name by yourself. Who really does that? They should just make "foo" and "foo.com" resolve to the same IP, it's already the big pile of "everything else" that doesn't go under a national domain.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Hah, took me a minute to get it. :P
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
Amazon registered the .book TLD, I believe.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
I'm going to go ahead and assume that anything with an eight character TLD is a scam. It'll save time.
I believe people advocating this is driven by two things (fine human values both!):
Greed: The desire to make money without adding value, not by more people registering domain names, but mainly by corporations having to protect their brands in more places
Stupidity: The lack of understanding DNS principles, as in limited to "domain names are what we see at the top of the browser window"
But in any case, now that all the adult stuff is moved successfully to the .XXX TLD, I think we are ready to introduce the new TLD .CON for all the scamming, phishing, spamming and jamming sites. All the idiots of the Interwebz will be happy to go to "microsoft.con" for their updates, and the rest of the world will be safe!
(Disclaimer: I have managed a small ccTLD since 1999)
Someone needs to get on it and get a 2 or 3 letter GTLD. Just imagine shortening a long url down to http ://shrt./dR7e - wouldn't even need to add a domain to that TLD.
You should really run your own set of alternate root servers.
Then we can all just point our routers or /etc/resolv.conf to your servers, and gain all your expertise without managing shit ourselves.
Think stolen twitter handles.
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
APK: the application sounds like it does a great job of fetching the data, but it seems much more useful to stick that data inside a DNS proxy or recursive resolver. Even if the resources required to run it are prohibitive for a crappy wifi router, it could be run on a box on the local network, and the crappy router uses it as its DNS resolver.
Then when I manage my home network of varying devices (tablets, phones, mixed OS laptops & desktops, even visitors) they will all get the benefit of DNS-level filtering.
I would manage a corporate network in a similar way. During DHCP when they get some local DNS resolvers, or hard-coded, the 1-3 local resolvers do all the DNS filtering for the entire network. A unified web UI on the master DNS resolver could micro-manage the rules if necessary (unblock something, add a manual block, local dns resolution, etc).