Live data from Hacker News

New gTLD Applied-For Strings

newgtlds.icann.org

91–100 of 178 posts

Re: New gTLD Applied-For Strings

#91
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised the US government didn't go for .dot, as in Department of Transportation. You could replace www.michigan.gov/mdot with mi.dot.

.dot would be funny, imagine telling people to go to dot.dot or even slashdot.dot

I used to work for a company whose domain name resembled: somethingcomm.com

Giving your email address over the phone took an hour.

Re: New gTLD Applied-For Strings

#93
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.localdomain would be better.

Also .local "Despite not being a valid top-level domain in the Internet, considerable DNS traffic that queries the local domain exists in the public Domain Name System.[1] In June 2009, the L root server received more than 400 such queries per second,[2] ranking 4th in DNS traffic of all TLDs after COM, ARPA, and NET." [1] Scary potential for mischief-making. Hopefully ICANN would reject applications for these domain…

.local is the default 'local domain' in most routers, it couldn't be used reliably as a tld. These queries are probably just routed by mistake/buggy software.

Re: New gTLD Applied-For Strings

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a default domain for these tlds? Let's take .home for example. How will this work when typing it into a browser? I believe it's possible to set things up so that "home" or "co.uk" on their own will work. As below, my memory is hazy, and I have no idea how many RFCs this behaviour might violate, but I certainly remember us doing so. My background: many, many years ago, I used to work for a minor country-code…

This would be tricky for LANs. I'm not sure too many corporate network admins would be happy with the amount of work they'd have to do to change up all the DNS entries when "test" no longer routes to "test.company.com" while you're on the company.com domain. You'd have a riot when the development staff has to take a couple weeks to change over all their pathnames. I'm of the opinion that RFCs don't matter if they're…

It wouldn't be quite such a big problem, since well-behaved clients should attempt to use 'home.company.com' before the root 'home'. Regardless of what is possible or allowed by RFCs, that behaviour should discourage TLD holders from trying to use a naked 'home', since a lot of users wouldn't be able to access it.

Re: New gTLD Applied-For Strings

#95
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And thus my question about a conventional default. It just seems to me that buying the gTLD will leave users fairly confused. If you want to access Apple (generically), users will still go to apple.com because even if they know that there's a .apple domain, what's the root host? My best guess is a conventional default emerges shortly.

Well it's up to whoever runs the root DNS for the domain I guess. But I've never heard of a domain with a default. edit: oh never mind i'm being thick :) And this isn't necessarily about people wanting to find apple's main website. Apple would have control over all subdomains and hosts in the namespace. They could give a subdomain to every app in the app store. So if you want the Pandora app, you don't navigate to Pa…

> But I've never heard of a domain with a default.

www is the default, he's not talking about software.

Re: New gTLD Applied-For Strings

#96
post #3

Google wants: .ads, .and, .android, .app, .are, .baby, .blog, .boo, .book, .buy, .cal, .car (no .cdr?), .channel, .chrome, .cloud, .corp (great way to snoop on poorly configured intranets), .cpa, .dad, .day, .dclk, .dds (New: Google Dentist!), .dev, .diy, .docs, .dog, .dot, .drive, .earth, .eat, .esq, .est, .family, .film, .fly, .foo, .free, .fun, .fyi, .game, .gbiz, .gle, .gmail, .gmbh (really?), .goo, .goog, .googl…

Another heavy hitter: famousfourmedia.com, who are responsible for the majority of the "dot [tld string] Limited" filings. They seem (I suppose "claim" is more accurate) to be registering on behalf of many companies, but from my rough count (60 filings), they are pretty close to Google (about 101) and Amazon (about 76).

Not to be too judgmental, but the site for famousfourmedia.com has so much stock photo that it hurts. Then again, with 60 filings, they probably can't hear my criticism over the sound of all the money they're making.

Re: New gTLD Applied-For Strings

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people that own most of these tlds will then sell domains on to ordinary people. So give it time and you, too, can have a .fail domain.

Possibly. But say I'm starting a video-sharing website - I'm at a big competitive disadvantage when my customers need to type and remember an extra domain-name level compared to my competitors (who own '.video', '.movie', '.youtube', etc. while i might own '.bobsvideo.fail').

Except that, as discussed above, "youtube" by itself is not a valid host name. It would have to be "mysite.youtube"

Still easier than you having "mysite.bobsvideo.fail" I agree, but frankly most people don't even find sites via the domain name. They'll google "Bobs Video" and see what comes up.

Re: New gTLD Applied-For Strings

#99

Yeesh...in case there was any doubt beforehand that this is a terrible idea, the initial list is now proof. They have taken something that has a valid technical reason to exist and turned it into a cesspool. Hopefully those in control of infrastructure take a stand and simply reject these "domains" entirely. Shouldn't be hard to set up sanity-restoring filters...let us please just pretend these are spam domains and n…

> Ironically anyone vain enough to reserve "." is surely ALSO going to keep a death grip on ".com"

Monter (the job people) and Monster (the expensive audio product people) are both going for .monster

How do they resolve that? Toss a coin? Auction it?

Post reply on HN