Earlier quoted context omitted.
At Google and many other tech companies, internal machines are configured to have go/ work just like you describe. Looks like someone even made a whole company around it https://www.golinks.com/blog/go-links-history/
A problem with this approach is browsers love to resolve it to http://go.com , so Disney may be getting a feed of what Googlers are interested in.
Shortest URLs on the Internet
51–60 of 208 posts
Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#52At one point of time, ` http://to ` resolved to a "It works!" page [1]. I've always thought it would be cool to have a URL shortener with links such as ` https://to/library ` or something similar. Oh, how much fun running your own TLD would be... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20150319211308/http://to/
I bought the punycode domain {emoji_rabbit}.to (i.e. "hop to") intending to build a url shortner. But I never did anything with it and let it expire. And now it doesn't seem like .to even lets you buy emoji domains anymore. I kind of wish I had held on to it.
Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#53Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google actually serves a bunch of pages through their TLD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.google
Google Search is actually a useful way to find sites on a TLD: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Agoogle https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Agle https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Agoog
You can combine the exclusion `-` syntax with this as well. If you want to find different sites on the TLD `.test` but only URLs on `home.test` are being shown, you can use this search:
site:test -site:home.test
Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#55Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#56Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#57I was also curious about this. It turns out that it's because dig interprets some TLDs as DNS record types (MD, MG, MR, MX) or DNS classes (IN and CH) of the same name! Not sure why, but when given only a type or class (without a domain name), dig actually queries for a list of the root servers, which explains the strange results. Looks like using the -q option to specify the domain name works around this.
Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#58Any FTP urls? I'm sure there are protocols with shorter schemes, but FTP is still semi-supported.
No longer supported by Firefox, Edge or Chrome https://www.zdnet.com/article/now-firefox-has-dropped-suppor...
Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bought the punycode domain {emoji_rabbit}.to (i.e. "hop to") intending to build a url shortner. But I never did anything with it and let it expire. And now it doesn't seem like .to even lets you buy emoji domains anymore. I kind of wish I had held on to it.
I can confirm that emoji domains for `.to` are still supported, I believe most of them are taken by now, though. You can use https://register.to to check.
Re: Shortest URLs on the Internet
#60At one point of time, ` http://to ` resolved to a "It works!" page [1]. I've always thought it would be cool to have a URL shortener with links such as ` https://to/library ` or something similar. Oh, how much fun running your own TLD would be... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20150319211308/http://to/
I wrote myself a Chrome extension that does this, using http://l/foo style links, and using Chrome's sync to share across devices. Works well enough but limited to desktops. Some large orgs maintain internal shorteners, like http://go links at Google.
If you set your dns search path to example.com then http://go would resolve to go.example.com which could be your link shortner.