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

.name Termination

neil.fraser.name

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 551 posts

Re: .name Termination

#71

Post by febusravenga »

decimalenough wrote: post #52

I've had a .name domain forever and I had no idea first.last.name was even a thing, meaning that it was possible to register this without owning last.name. That said, my domain is simply unusual.name, and everybody in my family has email addresses in the form first@unusual.name. So this is a no-op for me, and I gather www.unusual.name will also continue to work, since I own the 2nd level outright.

This is silly question, but is your family managing trust in you as lone guy - cousin, father, brother - having potentially access to all their emails?

I feel that I more trust some corpo (Google, etc) that one particular person.

I don't imagine setup where you can effictevely guarantee them full privacy.

Re: .name Termination

#74

Post by chrismorgan »

fetzu wrote: post #41
mchesters wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously. > 7.3. Provide any other relevant information to include with the request. If none, respond with “N/A.” > None.

Also note that their response is the exact length of the shortest allowed one, and yet still wrong.

I want to hear you justify, with perfect gravity, “N/A.” being the exact same length as “None.” Pictures of handwriting or specific fonts accepted. :D

Re: .name Termination

#75

Post by vidarh »

decimalenough wrote: post #52

I've had a .name domain forever and I had no idea first.last.name was even a thing, meaning that it was possible to register this without owning last.name. That said, my domain is simply unusual.name, and everybody in my family has email addresses in the form first@unusual.name. So this is a no-op for me, and I gather www.unusual.name will also continue to work, since I own the 2nd level outright.

It was deemphasized pretty early because people didn't understand it.

It made sense to us because our starting point was an email service letting people share lastname.sometld, but we never got close to as many registrants on .name as we had users on the webmail service (we had a couple of million accounts on that when it was sold to one of Marc Cubans companies for a relative pittance in the aftmath of the dot com bubble bursting)

Re: .name Termination

#76

Post by CodesInChaos »

delduca wrote: post #56

I never bet in any other than .com, .org, .net?

.org almost got screwed in 2019 too:

> In April 2019, ICANN proposed an end to the price cap of .org domains and effectively removed it in July in spite of having received 3,252 opposing comments and only six in favor. A few months later, the owner of the domain, the Public Interest Registry, proposed to sell the domain to investment firm Ethos Capital. After intense criticism from nonprofit groups and significant figures in Internet history, the proposal was scrapped.

Surprisingly not by Verisign, who gave up .org in 2003.

Re: .name Termination

#77

Post by swiftcoder »

cormorant wrote: post #61
pmdr wrote: post #44

> I had history with Verisign and did not trust them. I don't know what that history is, but did it really make a tld used by only 22k people more appealing?

According to Wikipedia, "Verisign was the outsourced operator for .name since the .name launch in 2002". That makes the reasoning yet more puzzling.

They ran the backend services, but didn't set the policies (until they acquired the operator in 2008-2009)

Re: .name Termination

#78

Post by psychoslave »

Breaking trust, one TLD at a time.

So, where is our fully decentralized TLD alternative, free of ICANN or any central authority to handle how we grant names by conventions, without any money scheme in the game that attracts malevolent actors moving only through greed strings?

Also, this time let’s make it like usenet, so "person:named:Neil Fraser" or even "::Neil Fraser" (harder to type but less culturally entangled into English).

Re: .name Termination

#79

Post by advisedwang »

eleventen wrote: post #5

> Minutes after my daughter was born, I also registered beverly.fraser.name. ...minutes?

Pretty crazy to be focused on anything other than your immediate family in after a birth... but not exactly unprecedented when you look at social media posts!

Re: .name Termination

#80

Post by echelon »

nneonneo wrote: post #62

It seems like the right thing they should do is discontinue new registrations but continue to honour existing ones (+ continuing to reserve any 2LD that has a 3LD registered on top). It’s a bit insane that they can decide to just terminate all existing 3LD registrations. One would hope that they’d at least continue to reserve the 2LDs for some period to avoid domain squatting, but this isn’t mentioned in the proposal…

That would be so cool and would make these limited hot commodities.

.name was one of the very first expansions of gTLDs back in the very early 2000s. It's a shame that it's being shut down as it was spearheaded by the ICANN itself rather than some registrar / investor like Donuts, Inc.

I suppose this is impractical as someone has to run the registry and there are costs associated with that. But don't the domain fees cover it?

Post reply on HN