Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

foo@bar.com

bar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 301 posts

Re: foo@bar.com

#211

Post by colejohnson66 »

evolve2k wrote: post #175
oauea wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you somehow unaware of the many, many, many people who used .dev in their local environments? You must've had some idea, since the initial plan was to use the .dev TLD for exactly that within Google. I've always hated Google for egoistically claiming this tld, and ICANN for letting them.

Basecamp’s Pow project comes to mind. It enables zero config local development configuration, whereby at the time it would make your locally running dev server available on .dev So instead of having to spin up a local server and then visiting say 127.0.0.1:3000, I could instead just visit myappname.dev and it would show me what would previously show on localhost or it would spin up a server first for that app then sh…

I just got an “untrusted connection” warning visiting pow.cx

Re: foo@bar.com

#212

Post by mcdevilkiller »

akritrime wrote: post #97
CydeWeys wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience here is that humor (especially deadpan) tends to land very poorly on HN, both because people are never contextually expecting it and because they tend to downvote it when they do recognize it, as they dislike perceived low effort comments that they don't feel are meaningfully contributing to the discussion (i.e. adding noise, not signal). HN may as well put "Don't try to be funny" in the FAQ, because it…

Mistake made and lesson learnt. After being introduced to the larger internet community via reddit, sometimes you slip up in more serious places like HN.

Yep, Hacker News is like Reddit, without the jokes and porn.

Re: foo@bar.com

#213

Post by joveian »

kubanczyk wrote: post #36
ryanbrunner wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice, is there any difference? As long as example.com is guaranteed to be reserved, I don't see any downside in using it. Not using .test was a big problem for tools like Pow a while ago, but that's because they were using .dev, which had no official recognition as being reserved or special-purposed. For e-mail addresses in particular, I could easily see a situation where your domain logic prevents you from us…

> In practice, is there any difference? RFC 6761 says that there is a difference when I actually resolve these names. The example.com, example.net, etc. will resolve normally to an existent IP. Moreover they resolve the same way on every DNS cache. The xxx.test will resolve as non-existent by default, unless you configure your own DNS specifically for them.

> unless you configure your own DNS specifically for them

or use horrible ISPs that redirect everything that isn't valid (and intercept DNS if you try to use an alternate DNS).

Re: foo@bar.com

#214

Post by elygre »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #166
dan-robertson wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. The reason for the change is generally thought to be email: you read least specific to most specific from left to right, like non-American dates, e.g firstname.lastname@group.department.university.edu 2. also I think ! was used rather than . for some networks at some times. Certainly I’ve heard this anecdote from some early users of the internet (or maybe other computer networks) 3. Traditionally the dot is the ze…

> 2. also I think ! was used rather than . for some networks at some times. Certainly I’ve heard this anecdote from some early users of the internet (or maybe other computer networks) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UUCP#Bang_path ! was used for manual routing from the source to the destination, when messages were copied from server to server via UUCP. People would write paths like ...!ucbvax!deptserver!myname , which…

...!mcsun!nuug!fics!el here :-). Of course, those were actual routes, rather than just reverse hierarchies.

Re: foo@bar.com

#215

Post by still_grokking »

CydeWeys wrote: post #200
dan-robertson wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. The reason for the change is generally thought to be email: you read least specific to most specific from left to right, like non-American dates, e.g firstname.lastname@group.department.university.edu 2. also I think ! was used rather than . for some networks at some times. Certainly I’ve heard this anecdote from some early users of the internet (or maybe other computer networks) 3. Traditionally the dot is the ze…

Interesting, and makes sense, seeing as how the Web didn't yet exist when domain names were first invented, but email did. It does make sense that they were thus represented in a manner catering to that use case. In hindsight I guess we'd prefer if emails were backwards too, e.g. com.gmail@cydeweys

Only that the @ ("at") reads terribly than.

So com.gmail/cydeweys maybe?

Or it could be just an object in a global namespace (accesses through a protocol specific facade). So com.gmail.cydeweys

Re: foo@bar.com

#216

Post by CydeWeys »

still_grokking wrote: post #215
CydeWeys wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, and makes sense, seeing as how the Web didn't yet exist when domain names were first invented, but email did. It does make sense that they were thus represented in a manner catering to that use case. In hindsight I guess we'd prefer if emails were backwards too, e.g. com.gmail@cydeweys

Only that the @ ("at") reads terribly than. So com.gmail/cydeweys maybe? Or it could be just an object in a global namespace (accesses through a protocol specific facade). So com.gmail.cydeweys

You could easily just use a different symbol, or pronounce it differently. We think it makes sense the way it is now, but that's only because we've all collectively gotten used to the meaning it has in email addresses. If it had had a different meaning all along then that would make sense to us.

com.gmail.cydeweys doesn't really work because you need some way to distinguish that as an email address and not just a subdomain on com.gmail. So it really does need a different delimiter, like how you need a different delimiter in URLs when it switches from the domain to the path (and then also to the querystring and fragment).

Re: foo@bar.com

#217

Post by benibela »

darkerside wrote: post #11
chrismeller wrote: post #4

Something that I’m surprised a lot of devs don’t know; there are official domains you’re supposed to use for documentation, testing, etc. They are specifically reserved by IANA for these purposes. Originally I think it was just example.com, but they now have a list of all them: https://www.iana.org/domains/reserved

I've typically used example.com for testing, but link says it's just for documentation. Sounds like .test is the sanctioned way. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.test

I've used example.com in the test cases of my webscraper. When they changed the links on the page, the test cases were failing, and I complained to them, but they did not care

Re: foo@bar.com

#218

Post by CydeWeys »

schwartzworld wrote: post #184
CydeWeys wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of overlap between file extensions and TLDs though. .py, .sh, and .app are some more examples (but a fully exhaustive list would be in the dozens if not hundreds). At some point you have to just treat them as the separate namespaces that they actually are (and not somehow try to block a TLD from being used as a file extension, or vice-versa). Besides, accidentally resolving a file extension to a TLD is…

not to mention .com

Geez, that's by far the best example and it didn't even occur to me. And it's an executable file type. Good call.

Re: foo@bar.com

#219

Post by glandium »

bialpio wrote: post #188
lozaning wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why I own fakefakefake.email it gives me some minor pleasure to provide this email address to people who insist on having an email address for me.

I use @mailinator.com for that purpose, it's oddly satisfying to put "lolno@mailinator.com" / etc in those places.

A lot of forms reject @mailinator.com and similar domains.

Re: foo@bar.com

#220

Post by themacguffinman »

CydeWeys wrote: post #208
themacguffinman wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit off topic, but I lament that these reserved domains are becoming less and less useful for testing web applications. I don't think you can acquire regular SSL certificates for reserved TLDs like "test.", yet an increasing number of browser features only work in "Secure Contexts" (ie. HTTPS only). Chrome treats "localhost." as a Secure Context by default, a nice convenience, but for the other reserved TLDs you ha…

Yeah, because of SSL, you really do need to own at least one real domain name that you use solely for testing. You can hang a bunch of subdomains off it and run separate applications on each one, but you are gonna want a real domain name. Fortunately domains are super cheap all things considered. A .dev domain (my preference, but admittedly I'm biased) is a buck a month. If you really want to penny-pinch there's much…

For me the cost isn't the main concern, it's the name collisions. I can easily obtain a short, memorable, and descriptive domain in a reserved TLD, but I probably have to find some obscure *.dev domain name because I'm competing with the entire world. Not the end of the world, I know, but I think it kind of defeats the purpose of reserved TLDs.
Post reply on HN